IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Review Application No. 156 of 2008 in Civil Writ Petition No.7417 of 2007 Date of decision: 22nd May, 2008 Ramparkash and others … Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Harsimran Singh Sethi, Advocate for the respondents. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. Present review application has been filed primarily on two grounds that in the judgment sought to be reviewed, reliance has been placed on Ajit Ram and Others v. State of Punjab and Others (CWP No. 8083 of 1998), which is only regarding transfer from Municipal Committees to Municipal Corporations or vice-versa and that Ajit Ram’s case (supra) does not take into consideration the absorption/ deputation. This argument of the applicants is misconceived and misplaced. In the judgment, we had upheld the orders (Annexure P-8 RA 156 of 2008 in CWP 7417 of 2007 and P-10). A perusal of page 7 of our judgment will reveal that we had upheld the order (Annexure P-10) passed by the Secretary Local Bodies and had reproduced the portion of the order in the judgment, which is as under: “...Admittedly, the orders dated 7.6.01, 26.12.2001 passed with regard to the absorption of both the petitioners in the Municipal Corporation Service were contrary to the law laid down by the High Court, as neither an effort was made to fill up the newly created posts of Sanitary Inspector by way of “Direct Recruitment” nor by way of “Promotion”. Consequently, the absorption or entry of the petitioners in the Municipal Corporation Service was a back door entry. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in their judgment reported as Tarek Chowdhary vs. State of West Bengal (2000(3) SCT 105) has held that “Equal treatment is liable to be given to all eligible candidates and the back door appointee cannot claim any preferential treatment”. Above all, the Hon'ble Apex Court has repeatedly held the plea of equality as enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution of India can be raised in positive concept and not on the basis of an earlier wrong because two wrongs cannot make a thing right. The sequence of events, which led to the passing of the orders of absorption of the petitioners in Municipal Corporation Services on both the occasions admittedly prove that entire exercise of absorption was completed ignoring the statutory service rules and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Courts. Consequently, there is no denial of the fact that the order of absorption of the petitioners in Municipal Corporation Services dated 7.6.01, 26.12.01 were passed in contravention of the statutory Service Rules, 1978 and the law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court in CWP No. 2 RA 156 of 2008 in CWP 7417 of 2007 17093 of 1995 and 8813 of 2K. Therefore, the order passed by the Director, Local Govt., Punjab dated 22.8.02 was passed for due observance of law.” The present review application has been filed without going into the spirit and tenor of the judgment. We had held absorption to be bad as the same was by way of backdoor entry without adherence to the rules and procedure. Second submission made in the review application is that we have not noticed the order dated 1st May, 2007 (Annexure P-15), whereby this Court had dismissed a writ petition preferred by workers’ union. We have taken note of this order in our judgment. Therefore also, the present petition is misconceived. No grounds have been made out to entertain the present application. Hence, the present review application is dismissed. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE [ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA] JUDGE May 22, 2008 rps 3