VICTOR ROBINSON Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of notification dated 25.07.2013 (Annexure P-6) appointing the private respondents as members of Haryana Public Service Commission. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said respondents have been appointed violating the mandate of law given by the Apex Court in State of Punjab versus Salil Sabhlok and others, 2013 AIR(SC) 1361.

(2.) The main contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondents No. 4, 5 and 6 have been appointed on account of their proximity with the political personalities of Haryana. It has been argued that respondent No.7 is involved in a criminal case and his petition for quashing of criminal proceedings stand dismissed by this Court in criminal miscellaneous petition and he is facing trial on the basis of charges framed on 23.04.2011 (Annexure P-10). Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondent No.7 is an accused in private complaint under Section 307 IPC. The petitioner claims that respondent No.7 has also been charged in another case of assault and trespassing as a member of unlawful assembly. Copy of the charge-sheet in a private complaint has been appended as Annexure P-8 dated 14.08.2010, in this regard. Reference has been made to Annexure P-10 another charge-sheet in a private complaint indicating that respondent No. 7 as a member of unlawful assembly had committed offence under Section 307 and 302 IPC. Miscellaneous application filed by respondent No. 7 for quashing of criminal proceedings stands dismissed by this Court. It is not out of place to observe here that respondent No. 7 was found innocent in the said case registered against him but on the basis of a private complaint he has been summoned and charge-sheeted vide order Annexure P-10.

(3.) Grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No. 7 though eligible to be appointed as member of State Public Service Commission but he is not a person of integrity.