JOGINDER SINGH GULATI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition for quashing the order of the State of Punjab, respondent No. 1 dated February 1, 1984, by which under section 17 (6) of the Punjab Town Inprevenent Act, 1921, (hereinafter called the Act), the post which the petitioner was holding as the Executive Officer of the Ludhiana Improvement Truest, (hereinafter called the Trust), was abolished on the ground that he was not found fit for becoming a member of the corresponding Trust service, vide decision taken on February 1, 1984. A copy of the said order is Annexure P.6.

(2.) The petitioner joined the Trust as a Head Clerk in the year 1961. On May 26, 1966, on promotion, he was appointed as the Executive Office of the trust. He was placed under suspension by the Trust, (respondent No. 2), on September 1, 1970, on the basis of certain charges of misuse of position, misconduct and corruption etc. Later on, he was dismissed from service by the Trust on October 22, 1975. He filed Civil Writ Petition No. 101 of 1976, challenging the said order of dismissal. The said writ petition was allowed by this Court on March 7, 1983 and the order of his dismissal from service dated October 22, 1975, was quashed. The said decision is J.S. Gulati v. Improvement Trust, Improvement Ludhiana,1983 2 SLR 100. During the pendency of the afore-said writ petition, section 17 of the Act was substituted vide Punjab Act 18 of 1973. It provides inter- alia that the State Government may, by notification, constitute, in the prescribed manner all or any of the following Trust Services, namely :

(3.) The case set up by the State Government in its return is that in pursuance of the judgment dated March 7, 1983, in Civil Writ Petition No. 101 of 1976, the petitioner joined the service on March 8, 1983. and not on May 4, 1983, as alleged by him, in paragraph 9 of the petition. Admittedly, the petitioner drew his salary with effect from March 8, 1983 onwards through regular monthly salary bills and the arrears of salary with effect from September 1, 1970 to March 7, 1983 through arrear bill. He joined duty with effect from March 8, 1983, therefore, there was no question of any subsequent order allowing him to join the duty by the Administrator. The order, Annexure P.1, was an order of posting in view of the joining report made by the petitioner on March 8, 1983. Of course, the petitioner was directed to relinquish the charge, vide Annexure P.1, and to join the Phagwara Improvement Trust, Phagwara, but he never joined there and challenged the said order by a separate writ petition wherein stay was granted to him and, thus, the petitioner never became a member of the said service. Since the petitioner failed to intimate his option within the time allowed, his case was referred to the screening committee which, after considering the performance, work and conduct of the petitioner felt that there being nothing adverse against the genuineness of the charges levelled against the petitioner, a fresh enquiry could be held, but it was considered that at this belated stage, it may be difficult to prove the charges although the conduct and reputation of the petitioner was very well reflected therefrom even then. On the basis of the report of the screening committee, the order, Annexure P. 6, was validly passed.