CWP Nos.5394, 7783, 5391, 12696, 1 17250 & 9350 of 1994 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 27.01.2010 1.CWP No.5394 of 1994 Mrs.Susheila Devi ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana & Others …Respondents 2.CWP No.7783 of 1994 Hawan Singh Dhull ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana & Others …Respondents 3.CWP No.5391 of 1994 Smt.Sushila Jain ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana & Others …Respondents 4.CWP No.12696 of 1994 Prahlad Kumar, District Revenue Officer ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana & Others …Respondents 5.CWP No.17250 of 1994 J.P.Panjeta ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana & Others …Respondents 6.CWP No.9350 of 1994 Vijinder Kumar Sharma ...Petitioner VERSUS CWP Nos.5394, 7783, 5391, 12696, 2 17250 & 9350 of 1994 State of Haryana & Others …Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: None for the petitioners Mr.RS Kundu, Addl.A.G., Haryana Mr.AM Punchhi, Advocate Mr.HN Mehtani, Advocate Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) This order will dispose of the aforesaid writ petitions as common questions of law and facts are involved in all these writ petitions. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from CWP No.5394 of 1994. Petitioners in this bunch of writ petitions are either Class II or Class III employees working in the State of Haryana whose candidature was not recommended by the Committee constituted or who have failed to seek appointment for the year 1992. The Government of Haryana with a view to fill up 30 vacancies of HCS (Executive Branch) of the year 1992 issued a notification dated 9.3.1992 for special recruitment pursuant to Proviso to Rule 5 of the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) Rules, 1930. The eligibility conditions prescribed are Graduate of recognized University, age not more than 45 years, 7 years of continuous service under Haryana Government on 1.1.1992 and should have over all service record of “Very Good” category i.e. at least 5 “Very Good” or better reports and two reports of not less than “Good” category during the last seven years (from 1984-85 to 1990-91). CWP Nos.5394, 7783, 5391, 12696, 3 17250 & 9350 of 1994 The petitioners claiming to be eligible also applied and their names were sponsored by the concerned departments. A Special Committee came to be constituted to screen the eligible candidates. The Special Committee comprised of Chief Secretary as Chairman and two Officers as its members to be nominated by the State Government. The Committee was required to prepare panel twice the number of vacancies considered suitable for appointment. The list/panel was to be sent to the Haryana Public Service Commission for recommendation in order of merit. It is alleged that all the writ petitioners were recommended by their Head of the Departments. However, names of such candidates have not been forwarded by the Committee headed by the Chief Secretary. It appears that aggrieved of the constitution of the Committee and the procedure adopted, some writ petitions came to be filed before this court by the employees belonging to Class III and Class II, respectively. Some writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos.3801, 3936 and 4161 of 1994 came to be disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 4.4.1994 with the following observations:- “... The present writ petitioners are class III special recruitment vide notification dated 9.2.1992 have not been recommended by the Committee headed by the Chief Secretary to Government, Haryana and two other senior officers. We have ourselves gone through the criteria adopted by the high power committee, headed by the Chief Secretary and the assessment made by the said committee. In our opinion, the criteria adopted by the high power committee in recommending the names of CWP Nos.5394, 7783, 5391, 12696, 4 17250 & 9350 of 1994 Class III government employees does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. It is neither arbitrary nor offends Article 14 of the Constitution. These writ petitions, therefore, do not hold any merit and accordingly to stand summarily rejected.” Another bunch of writ petitions filed by Class II Officers i.e. CWP Nos.3779, 3937, 3931, 4032 and 4255 of 1994 also came to be disposed of vide another order of the same date with the following observations:- “In all these writ petitions, the petitioners are Class-II officers of the Government of Haryana. We heard learned counsels for the parties at great length. We also perused the return filed on behalf of the respondents in two writ petitions, namely, Civil Writ Petition No.3779 of 1994. Since the contentions are identical we read these two written statements in other writ petitions also. The learned Advocate General, appearing for the State of Haryana, placed bgefore us the final list prepared by the high power committee headed by the Chief Secretary. We have gone through the said list very carefully. The learned Advocate General after obtaining instructions from the Chief Secretary to the State of Haryana, states that in order to avoid further litigation and in order to give fair opportunity to the petitioners and other similarly CWP Nos.5394, 7783, 5391, 12696, 5 17250 & 9350 of 1994 situated employees who have secured 70 and above marks in the assessment made by the high power committee, headed by the Chief Secretary and other two officers, the names of such candidates will be forwarded to the Haryana Public Service Commission. The learned Advocate Gneeral, Haryana further states that this is one time concession and it may not be treated as a precedent. This contention is made in order to reduce the rigour faced by some of the candidates who claim that they are meritorious. Statement accepted. In view of this statement, the learned counsel for the petitioners after obtaining instructions from the respective petitioners, apply for withdrawal of the writ petitions. Writ petitions are allowed to be withdrawn. Officer to make available certified copy of this order within two days to the parties. The learned Advocate General assures the court that on receipt of the copy of this order, necessary action will be taken in that behalf within two weeks therefrom. The Haryana Public Service Commission not to finalise the results until the interviews of the new proposed candidates are held.” Consequent upon the order passed in CWP No.3779 of 1994, names of some of the writ petitioners who were otherwise eligible were CWP Nos.5394, 7783, 5391, 12696, 6 17250 & 9350 of 1994 forwarded. Number of vacancies also came to be forwarded to the Haryana Public Service Commission. From the written statement filed on behalf of the Controller of Examination, Haryana Public Service Commission, it appears that 123 candidates were being recommended to the Commission for their consideration for recruitment against 30 vacancies. On consideration of their cases, the Commission recommended the names of 30 candidates to respondent no.1 for appointment against 30 vacancies and 7 candidates were brought on the waiting list. It appears that in the meanwhile, another writ petition being CWP No.3936 of 1994 came to be filed before this Court by one Ram Mehar Sharma Personal Assistant challenging the selection/appointment. The aforesaid writ petition came to be disposed of by this Court vide order dated 4.4.1994. Civil Appeal No.9779 of 1996 filed against the aforesaid order dated 4.4.1994 passed by this Court came to be disposed of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 21.3.2003. While considering the challenge to the selection/appointment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court made following observations:- “This appeal was listed yesterday and none appeared for the appellant. Today also, none appears for the appellant. Notification for Special Recruitment to the post of Haryana Civil Services (Executive Branch) was made in the year 1992. The recruitment was to be made from serving class II and Class III State Government employees. Recommendations were to be made by a Committee headed by the Chief CWP Nos.5394, 7783, 5391, 12696, 7 17250 & 9350 of 1994 Secretary as Chairman and two other senior officers. A criteria was adopted by the higher power committee for assessment and selection to the above services. The appellant was not found fit by the committee and, therefore, not selected. The private respondents no.3 to 15 were selected by the high power committee and they were duly appointed in the above services in 1994. They assumed charge subsequently. The High Court, after going through the record, held that the criteria adopted by the high power committee, in recommending names for appointment, did not suffer from any infirmity or illegality and, accordingly, dismissed the writ petition. We have heard learned counsel for the respondents. In view of the above finding of the High Court it is not a case for interference by exercising our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. That apart, private respondents have already joined and they are working since 1996. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.” In this bunch of writ petitions also, the petitioners have challenged the selection/appointment made in the year 1994 and the appointees are working since then. This Court in two orders (Annexures R-5/1 and R-5/2) noticed here-in-above, dismissed the writ petitions filed by Class III and CWP Nos.5394, 7783, 5391, 12696, 8 17250 & 9350 of 1994 Class II employees relating to recommendations made by the Committee constituted by the Government and refused to interfere. Even after the selection was made, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has upheld the selection vide its order dated 21.3.2002. The selection was made in the year 1994. It is almost 16 years now. Most of the petitioners must have retired or even the selectees might have retired by now. That is why none has appeared on behalf of the petitioners to prosecute the writ petitions. Otherwise also, neither the recommendations nor the selection have been interfered in earlier writ petitions by this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court. At this belated stage, no relief can be given to the petitioners. In view of the above, I find no merit in these writ petitions which are accordingly dismissed. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 27.01.2010 MFK