AMRIT ANJANA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court by filing the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing of the order dtd. 16/5/2022 (Annexure P-15), vide which respondent No.4 has been appointed as President, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, 'District Commission'), Sangrur. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought for directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner as President of the District Commission, Sangrur, being at Sr. No.2 in the merit list, which has fallen vacant due to the resignation tendered by Sh. Sant Parkash Sood within a period of six months. Further, a prayer has been made to appoint the petitioner or respondent No.4 to the post of President, District Commission, Patiala.

(2.) The brief facts, as have been pleaded in the petition, are that the State Government vide public notice dtd. 9/1/2021 (Annexure P-1) invited applications for filling up 09 posts of President, District Commissions at Barnala, Bathinda, Fatehgarh Sahib, Sangrur, Ropar, Kapurthala, Muktsar Sahib, Jalandhar and Faridkot, on whole time basis. The petitioner applied on 5/2/2021 for the post of President, District Commission, Sangrur and vide application dtd. 9/2/2021, she applied for the post of President, for District Fatehgarh Sahib. The Selection Committee, after assessing the suitability of the candidates, submitted district wise list of eligible candidates for recommendation in order of merit and forwarded the same to the State Government for appointment, vide communication dtd. 6/4/2021. The name of the petitioner was at Sr.No.2 for District Sangrur and one Sh. Sant Parkash Sood was at Sr. No.1, who was given appointment on 23/6/2021 and he joined as such on 23/6/2021 itself and thereafter, he submitted his resignation, which was accepted by the State Government on 31/1/2022 and he relinquished the charge of the said post on 2/2/2022. The petitioner submitted representation(s) dtd. 19/7/2021 and 20/7/2021 (Annexure P-4), claiming appointment as President, District Commission, Malerkotla. Thereafter, she submitted representations dtd. 22/3/2022 and 25/3/2022 (Annexure P-3) to respondents for appointment against the post which got vacant due to resignation of Sh.Sant Parkash Sood and when no action on the said representations was taken by the State Government, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition before this Court seeking directions to the respondents to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner and to appoint her against the post of President, District Commission, Sangrur or Malerkotla. The writ petition was dismissed by this Court vide judgment dtd. 15/9/2022 (Annexure P-6) on the ground that vacancy stood consumed at the relevant point of time as Sh. Sant Parkash Sood was appointed on 23/6/2021 and his resignation was accepted on 31/1/2022 and that he was not impleaded as party respondent to the petition. The said judgment dtd. 15/9/2022 was challenged by the petitioner in LPA No.802 of 2023 titled as 'Amrit Anjana v. State of Punjab and others. In the said appeal, Sant Parkash Sood was impleaded as respondent No.4 and another person, namely Jot Naranjan Singh Gill was impleaded as respondent No.5, as in the interregnum Jot Naranjan Singh Gill was appointed as President, District Commission, Sangrur on 13/16/5/2022 and he joined on 17/5/2022. The said appeal was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court, vide judgment dtd. 15/2/2024 (Annexure P-7). Thereafter, the petitioner filed a review application in the said LPA, which was also dismissed by the Division Bench on 16/4/2024 and the said orders were assailed by the present petitioner by filing SLP(Civil) No.13684- 13685 of 2024 (Amrit Anjana v. State of Punjab and others) which was converted into Civil Appeal No.12420-12421 of 2024. The said appeal was accepted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide order dtd. 14/11/2024 (Annexure P-12) and the judgment dtd. 15/9/2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition as well as judgment and order dtd. 15/2/2024 and 16/4/2024 passed by the Division Bench in LPA and review application respectively, were set aside and the present petition i.e. CWP No.8869 of 2022 was restored and the appellant (present petitioner) was permitted to amend the writ petition by incorporating a challenge to the appointment of the fifth respondent (Jot Naranjan Singh Gill). Consequently, the petitioner has sought amendment of the writ petition by impleading Jot Naranjan Singh Gill as party respondent. The said amendment has been allowed by this Court, vide order dtd. 6/2/2025.

(3.) Separate written statements have been filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 and 4, wherein the above said facts have not been disputed. In the written statement filed by way of an affidavit of respondent No.4-Sh. Jot Naranjan Singh Gill, it has been stated that respondent No.4 had earlier participated in the selection process for the post of President, District Commissions in the State of Punjab against vacant posts and his name was recommended by the prevalent Selection Committee against the vacant post of President, District Commission, Mansa, vide recommendation letter dtd. 22/12/2016 (Annexure R-4/1), however, the said recommendations were not accepted by the State Government and vide letter dtd. 11/9/2017, it was directed that the selection process be carried out afresh (Annexure R-4/2). Aggrieved against the said action, respondent No.4 filed CWP No.30239 of 2018 titled as 'Jot Naranjan Singh Gill v. State of Punjab and others', before this Court, seeking quashing of order dtd. 11/9/2017 passed by respondent No.1, whereby the recommendations of the Selection Committee for appointment of the petitioner to the post of President, District Commission, Mansa was rejected, and for seeking appointment.