STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. KAMAL DEV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Different parties have preferred four different Letters Patent Appeals from one and the same judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Writ Petition No. 2491 of 1990. These are No. 769 of 1992, 957 of 1992, 1219 of 1992 and 611 of 1993. Thus it will be proper to dispose of these four appeals by this common judgment.

(2.) While assailing the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 25.2.1992, the appellants before us have mainly contended :-

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondents while supporting the judgment of the learned Single Judge has argued that the contention of the respondents (petitioners in the writ petition) with regard to the validity of the constitution of the Commission as well as delegation of power to the alleged committees by its Chairman being contrary to the rules, ought to have been accepted by the learned Single Judge. Before we proceed to discuss the contentions raised by the respective counsel before us, we consider it appropriate to state in brief the relevant facts.