SHIV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present writ i.e. Civil Wit Petition 15234 of 1993 and other connected matters provide a classic example of making public appointments in a most cloistered mariner. Obviously, therefore, the demand of petitioners is to quash, Annexure P-5, the very appointment letter issued to Gurpreet Singh and others, respondents 7 to 39 herein. In consequence of setting aside of appointment letter, Armexure P-5, petitioners further grave for issuance of fresh advertisement and appointments to be made to the posts under contention in accordance with the law by providing equal opportunity to all. The relevant facts culled out from this petition as also from other writs, subject matter of decision by a common judgment, on which the prayers, as noted above, rest, need a necessary mention.

(2.) Shiv Kumar petitioner (in C.W.P. 15234 of 1993) is a Senior Assistant in RDE-III Branch, Financial Commissioner's Secretariat, Chandigarh. With a view to occupy-better position, status and emoluments, as in the desire of every human individual, he applied to be considered for the post of Block Development and Panchayat Officer (Class-II) (hereinafter to be referred to as BDPO) in response to advertisement, Annexure P-1, issued by the State of Punjab inviting applications for some vacant posts of BDPO (Grade-II) in the pay scale of Rs. 2100-3700/-. The post was temporary for six months or till candidates duly recommended by the Punjab Public Service Commission (hereinafter to be referred to as the Commission) were available. However, the services were extendable afterwards beyond the period of six months after giving notional break. The selection as per advertisement was to be made on the basis of written test in English and Punjabi of general knowledge and regarding Community Development and Panchayati Raj apart from interview. The applications from eligible candidates had to reach the Joint Secretary Rural Development and Panchayat Department, Punjab, SCO 112-113, Sector 17, Chandigarh, within ten days of the publication of advertisement. It requires to be mentioned that the advertisement was published in the News paper on September 27, 1992. Even though only ten days period was allowed to send the applications to the Joint Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Department, yet the written test was held on July 4, 1993. It was of 100 marks and had covered extensively all the subjects concerning general knowledge, History, Geography, Maths, Medical, Non-medical, Agriculture, Community Rural and Development and Panchayat Raj etc. Copy of question paper has been annexed with this writ as Annexure P-2 which would reveal that there were 100 questions in all carrying one mark each. Answer to each question was indicated by four choices i.e. (a), (b), (c) and (d). The candidate was required to answer out of (a), (b), (d), (d) in the box provided in the answer sheet against each question. All the 100 questions were to be attempted in two hours, the time limit fixed for answering the questionnaire. Petitioner passed the written test and according to the merit list, he was placed at Sr.No. 8 in the General category. It requires to be mentioned that the posts were kept reserved for Scheduled Costs/Scheduled Tribe and Ex-servicemen (hereinafter to be referred to as SC/ST/ESM) in accordance with government instructions. The number of total posts required is not mentioned in the advertisement and, therefore, there is no mention either with regard to number of posts reserved for SC/ST/ESM. The candidates shown at Sr. Nos. 5 and 6 in the merit list belonged to reserved category. Petitioner was, thus, at Sr.No. 6 in the merit list of General category candidates. He was called for interview vide letter dated September 24, 1993 and was actually interviewed on October 12, 1993 by the Interviewing Selection Committee consisting of respondents 2 to 6, who are Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister, Punjab, Secretary, Government of Punjab, Department of Social Welfare, Secretary to Government of Punjab, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Joint Department Commissioner (IRD), Punjab and the Director, Ex- servicemen Reforms Department, Punjab. It is the case of petitioner that he was expecting to get atleast 90% marks in the interview. However, just a day prior to the date when petitioner was actually interviewed i.e. on October 11, 1993, Secretary to the Government of Punjab conveyed his decision to the Departmental Selection Committee that there would be 50 marks in the interview for the post of BDPO, the division whereof would be made for physical fitness, personality, attitude, general knowledge and for general intelligence or any other aspect considered appropriate by the Committee. After the entire process of written test and interview was over, the attention of the Selection Committee came to be focused on respondents 7 to 39, who were issued appointment letters on November 26, 1993, copy whereof has been placed on records as annexure P-5. It is this selection/appointment letter, it is reiterated, that, the petitioner elamours, should be quashed and fresh appointments made in accordance with law.

(3.) It is made out from the petition that all the selected candidates were required to get themselves medically examined and also to produce character verification before appointments, yet in the present case they have been given the appointments by deviating from this requirement of law. The Government vide circular letter dated February 27, 1987, directed all the heads of the departments to get the verification of character antecedents and medical examination of all the selected candidates before appointment in pursuance of its policy decision circulated vide letter dated June 11, 1951 and February 1, 1957, which was duly mentioned in letter dated February 27, 1987. Petitioner pleads that not only the Government instructions aforesaid were violated with impunity but favours have been shown to certain candidates who ultimately came to be selected. Some of the candidates selected were not even eligible to apply. The last candidate who was selected and appointed was at Sr.No. 73 in the merit list prepared as a result of written test out of total list of 75 candidates. The arbitrary and illegal manner in which selection were made was even highlighted by the Press in the reports that came to be published in Punjab Kesri and Panjabi Tribune dated December 3, 1993 and December 4, 1993 respectively. The news item from Punjab Kesri had caption "BLAME OF FAVOURITISM IN RECRUITMENT OF BLOCK DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT OFFICERS." It recites that Posting has already been made of newly appointed women Development Officers, Harcharan Pal Cheema has been posted as Development Officer (Woman Programme), Jalandhar while Kuljit Kaur, Assistant Project Officer, Sangrur, Gurbinder Kaur, Assistant Project Officer, Amritsar, Taranjit Kaur Bajwa of Jalandhar as Assistant Project Officer, Gurdaspur, Manjit Kaur, Development Officer (Women Programme), Ferozepur, jasbir Kaur, Assistant Project Officer, Ferozepur and Asha Rani, Development Officer (Women Programme) Mansa. All these officers have taken charge of new posts. The news item further recites that the Punjab Government has also appointed two and half dozen Block Development and panchayat Officers. It has been alleged by some candidates, who had appeared for interview that selection has been made by favouritism and relatives of many ministers have been appointed. It is worth mentioning here the same candidates who had obtained96% marks in the written test have not been selected. It is possible that the selection of BDPOs is challenged in the Punjab & Haryana High Court as in the case of adhoc officers of Municipal Committees, Assistant District Transport Officers and Excise & Taxation Officers. It is further recited that these persons were appointed on adhoc basis by the Punjab Government in violation of rules and regulations and the persons, who were ignored, approached the High Court resulting into stay of many appointments. 3-A. The news item from Panjabi Tribune is with the caption "CHEATING OF YOUTH BY GOVERNMENT IN DIRECT RECRUITMENT OF BDPO - KANTH." It recites that the Punjab Government has cheated the youth while making direct recruitment of BDPOs in violation of rules and regulations. While talking to press reporters these allegations have been made by Shri Satnam Singh Kanth, leader of Bahujan Samaj Party and leader of opposition in the Punjab Vidhan Sabha. Shri Kanth disclosed that recently the Government by recruiting 33 BDPOs has given undue benefits to the Congress Ministers, MLAs and officers and obliged the nears and dears of the officers. He disclosed that Rachhpal Singh is son of Master Jagir Singh, Punjab Rural Development and Panchayat Minister, Atul Kumar nephew of Dr. Kewal Krishan, Finance Minister, Navdeep Singh son of Shri Avtar Singh, MLA, Faridkot, Bhupinder Singh son of Sewa Singh, nephew of Shri Multani, Director Panchayati Raj, Subodh Kumar son of Shri Ram Gopal, IAS, Secretary, Panchayati Raj, Surinder Pal Singh son of Late Shri Shadi Lal, famous Congress leader (Relative of Former President Giani Zail Singh), Vishavkaramjeet Singh son of Shri Sewa Singh, Advocate leader. Shri Kanth blamed that in making theseappointments educational qualification has not been taken into count. According to reliable sources, relatives of Public Relation and Information Minister, Shri Surinder Kapur has been appointed as BDPO, whose qualification is compartment in B.A. Shri Kanth alleged for not giving due share to reservation and said that only one post has been offered to son of an ex-serviceman whereas there were four posts meant for them. The Government recruited 33 BDPOs in the first list. When relatives of other Ministers resisted to recruit them, then the names of three BDPOs were struck down from the list among whom were Ajaib Singh son of Bhupinder Singh, Bhatinda, Harnek Singh son of Charan Singh, patiala, Bhupinder Singh son of Gopal Singh, Jalandhar. Prior to this, the Government has earned bad name by collecting lacs of rupees through' corruption while recruiting ETO and BOs. Shri Kanth while commenting on this policy of favouritism of Government narrated that the future of youth is going into darkness. He demanded from the Government that order of these recruitments be immediately quashed and make fresh recaruitments of BDPOs on the basis of educational qualifications and merit.