IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 23064 of 2011 Date of Decision: 13.12.2011 Om Parkash Gurah ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present : S/Shri Mansur Ali and H.S.Deol, Advocates, for the petitioner. **** RANJAN GOGOI, C.J.(Oral) This Public Interest Litigation has been filed seeking to challenge the selection of members of the Punjab Public Service Commission. While the challenge to selection of respondent Nos. 6 and 9 has been specifically made on the ground of possibility of bias on the part of respondent No. 3 i.e. Chief Minister of the State of Punjab, the selection of other respondents has been challenged on various other grounds, details of which are available in the pleadings contained in the writ petition. In so far as the specific challenge against the selection of respondents No. 6 and 9 is concerned, it has been pointed out that respondent No. 6 was serving as O.S.D. to the Chief Minister (respondent No. 3) and respondent No. 9 is a party functionary. CWP No. 23064 of 2011 [2] A Full Bench judgment of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 11846 of 2011 (Salil Sabhlok V. Union of India and others) has laid down the norms to be complied with while making selections. The first step is the constitution of a Search Committee. The recommendations of the Search Committee is to be placed before a High Powered Committee consisting of the Chief Minister, Speaker of Assembly and the Leader of the Opposition. As the constitution of the High Powered Committee is laid down consideration by the said Committee of a person known to any of its members will not ipso- facto vitiate the selection. The doctrine of necessity that will step in is a complete answer to any challenge made on such a ground or on the ground of bias. Selection of members of High Power Bodies like Punjab Public Service Commission, at times, defeat the aspirations of a large number of people who often come to the Court raising various issues including fine questions of law. All such questions will have to be dealt with by the Courts in a meaningful and practical manner so as to ensure that the working of the machinery as contemplated by the Constitution or the laws do not come to a standstill, merely because fine questions of law have been raised concerning the appointment of members of such bodies. Rather, members of such High Powered Bodies should be allowed to function and their performance should be judged on a fine scale before any adverse finding is recorded against any of them. CWP No. 23064 of 2011 [3] In the aforesaid circumstances we do not consider the present to be a fit case for being entertained at this stage. We, therefore, decline to entertain this PIL leaving it open for the newly constituted Public Service Commission to effectively function so that not only constitutional duties are performed but the public at large get an opportunity to judge the quality of such performance and ventilate their grievances, if any, in this regard before the appropriate forum at the correct stage. PIL shall stand disposed of in terms of the above. (RANJAN GOGOI) CHIEF JUSTICE (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 13.12.2011 'ravinder'