STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. SATISH KUMAR SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Single Judge while deciding Civil Writ Petition No. 261(5 of 1992 has directed "that the claim of the petitioners for appointment to the post of P.C.S.(EB) (Class I) from Register A-II be considered and appointments to be made. Needful be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment". The State of Punjab is aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge. It has consequently filed Letters Patent Appeal No.56 of 1993. Simultaneously, Civil Writ Petitions Nos.785 and 3768 of 1993 have been filed for the grant of similar reliefs. The basic issue in all the three cases being identical, these can be disposed of by one order. A few facts as emanating from the record of the Letters Patent Appeal may be briefly noticed.

(2.) The three respondents are holding ministerial appointments in different offices in the Punjab State. On December 19, 1990, the State of Punjab issued a Circular to the various authorities requesting them to recommend the names of persons in the prescribed form for filling up of seven vacancies in the Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch) (Class I) (hereinafter referred to as the Service). The names of the three respondents were recommended by respective authorities. A total of 15 names were recommended for the seven vacancies which had to be filled up from amongst the persons holding ministerial appointments. These names were forwarded to the Punjab Public Service Commission alongwith the character rolls pf the employees. The Commission held an interview on December 18, 1991. The result of the interview was declared on January 6, 1992. It was published in the Daily Tribune on January 7, 1992. The Commission recommended the names of seven persons whom it considered suitable for appointment to the Punjab Civil Service. The names of the three respondents were not included in this list.

(3.) In the year 1991, Mr. Raj Pal Gupta, District Transport Officer, Sangrur who was a member of the Punjab Civil Service expired. As a result, a vacancy became available in the Service. In addition to this, two more vacancies had become available prior to December 18, 1991. As such, three vacancies had occurred before the date of interview. Furthermore, two more vacancies had become available on account of the retirement of officers on April 30, 1992 and May 31, 1992. According to tie respondents, the five vacancies had to be filled up from amongst the members of Class III Services holding ministerial appointments. Relying on the instructions issued by the Chief Secretary to Government Punjab vide letter dated March 22, 1957, the three respondents claimed that they were entitled to be considered for these additional vacancies which had become available within six months of the recommendation made by the Commission. This claim having been upheld by the learned Single Judge, the State has come up in this appeal.