HARBANS LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Concedingly the facts and circumstances of this cases are squarely covered by the law laid down in Arjun Dev and others . State of Haryana and others, 1992 2 RSJ 498.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the respondents, however, urged that instructions issued on 9.3.90 explained the instructions issued dated 22.7.57 would prevail and cited CWP No. 14736 of 1991 decided on 1.12.1992 in support of his contention.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners controverted the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent. It was urged that the instructions already issued were explained in the above cited judgment i.e. Arjun Dev and others . State of Haryana and others, 1992 2 RSJ 498. Instructions cannot take away the basis of judgment or set aside or undo the effect of judicial judgment directly or indirectly. The respondent, cannot by administrative fiate set aside judicial pronouncement. For this proposition reliance has been placed on decision in CWP No. 10346 of 1992 wherein it was observed that "the clarification issued by the Government, if any, cannot undo the judgment passed by this Court," This view is further supported by the judgment of this Court in CWP No. 11995 of 89 decided on 13th October, 1993.