State of
Punjab Vs. Charanjit Singh [1993] INSC 225
(20 April 1993)
Reddy,
K. Jayachandra (J) Reddy, K. Jayachandra (J) Singh N.P. (J)
CITATION:
1994 SCC Supl. (2) 577
ACT:
HEAD NOTE:
ORDER
1.This
appeal is filed by the State of Punjab. The respondent was tried for offence punishable under Section 25 of
the Arms Act read with Section 5 of the TADA Act. The prosecution case is that
on April 28, 1988, the Head Constable, along with
other police officials as a party, headed by the A.S.I. were moving about and
there was an encounter during which it is alleged that the respondent was
apprehended and on search the police recovered one AK-47 rifle and some
cartridges. The designated court acquitted after examining the evidence on
record. At one stage, the court pointed out that in a case of this nature, it
would have been better if some independent witnesses would have been examined.
It is against that finding that the present appeal is filed.
2.It
has been held in a number of cases that in a case of this nature, independent
witnesses need not be there and even evidence of official witnesses can be
relied upon provided it inspires confidence. In the instant case, the lower
court has pointed out certain other circumstances also. The view taken by the
court below cannot be said to be unreasonable. The criminal appeal is dismissed
accordingly.
578
SATYPAL SINGH V. HARYANA STATE SUB. SERVICE SELECTION BOARD
ORDER
1.
Leave granted.
2.
This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Division Bench of the
High Court of Punjab and Haryana in CWP No. 15310 of 1993 dated + From the
Judgment and Order dated 5-8-1993 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in
C.W.P. No. 153 1 0 of 1993 579 3-8-1993 dismissing the writ petition in limine.
The appellant is an ex-serviceman, served in the Army and was disabled to the
extent of 40%. He was a "Technical Tracer".
He was
appointed on an ad hoc basis on 8-11-1991. His name was recommended by Chairman, Rajya Sainik Board, Haryana for
absorption as a regular candidate. The Subordinate Service Selection Board (for
short 'the Board') while considering his case along with the children of the
deceased disabled persons selected Respondents 4 and 5 and the case of the
appellant was not recommended. Calling in question of his non-selection, the
appellant filed the writ petition, as said, it came to be dismissed. The case
of the appellant is based on the instructions issued by the Government of Haryana
dated 6-3-1972 wherein it was stated that as and when vacancy reserved for
ex-servicemen arises, intimation will be sent to the Employment Exchange which
would indicate that a disabled ex-serviceman between 20% and 40% disability and
the dependents of those killed/disabled beyond 50% in action would be
recommended for the post. The name of the candidates who are available in the
Employment Exchange and with the R.S. Board in their absence would be
recommended to the Board, criterion 3 postulates as under:
"The
appointment of disabled ex-servicemen (disability between 20% to 50%) and of
the dependents of those killed in the first instance and later their cases will
be referred to the Haryana Subordinate Services Selection Board for regular
appointment." Based thereon, contention has been raised by the learned
advocate for the appellant that once the name has been sponsored by the Sainik
Board and the employer made an ad hoc employment and recommended to the Board
for regularisation, so long as there exists a vacancy and a person who suffers
disability between 20% to 50% is available, he is entitled to be regularised as
of course and right. The Board in its counter stated that the Government had
adopted merit criteria in the instructions issued by the Government on
21-5-1979 that Class I and Class II posts for the ex-servicemen would be reserved
at 5% and for Class III and Class IV posts 25% were to be reserved for the
candidates who are found to be suitable for recruitment. In the first instance,
the disabled ex-servicemen would be considered for recruitment on merit and in
the absence of their availability, the children of the disabled ex- servicemen
would be considered. The Board prescribed two modes i.e. written test and viva
voce or viva voce alone and the claims of all the persons would be considered
according to the above procedure. The procedure prescribed by the second
category, namely, that if the selection is only by viva voce, 20% of the marks
were prescribed for the viva voce and a candidate is required to get minimum
marks for selection. In another resolution the Board had adopted, for
considering the claims for selection of the candidates only by viva voce,
allocation of marks for each criterion i.e. qualifications, higher
qualifications, experience, sports, special knowledge of the subject etc. and
viva voce. The appellant did not secure the minimum of the 5 marks prescribed
for the viva voce as a result he could not be recommended for regularisation.
We find that the procedure adopted by the Board is well-justified and fair.
3.In
the resolution passed by the Board on 15-9-1991 as stated earlier, they adopted
criteria in two ways where there is a written examination followed by viva
voce, they prescribed 12 1/2% of the total marks for interview; where the
selection is only by viva voce, they prescribed various marks for 580 qualifications,
etc., enumerated hereinbefore and with regard to the viva voce marks the
candidate is required to secure minimum as stated under:
"In
case of second method of selection, i.e., selection by holding interviews only,
the Board resolves that the candidates of E.S.M. category who obtain- more than
5 marks out of 20 marks fixed for viva voce;
more
than 6 marks out of 21-30 marks fixed for viva voce;
more
than 7 marks out of 31-40 marks fixed for viva voce;
more
than 8 marks out of 41-50 marks fixed for viva voce;
more
than IO marks out of 51-60 marks fixed for viva voce;
will
become suitable for the purpose of recommendation." Thus the procedure
adopted for minimum marks is also just and fair procedure in selecting the
candidates and for recommending the candidates for regularisation. Since the
appellant did not secure minimum of the marks prescribed for viva voce
obviously the Board could not select him and recommend him for regular
absorption. The contention, therefore, that the regularisation should be
automatic, and as of right since there is no other candidate available from
handicapped quota of first category, is untenable.
4.It
is stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that there is one post still
vacant, unfilled and that he has been working in the post. When the matter had
come up for admission such a representation was in fact made and by an order
dated 3-1-1994 this Court stated that if there is
any such vacancy it will be open to the respondents to allow the appellant to
continue in the post. It is stated that he has been continuing as such. Under
these circumstances till the regular selection for absorption is made, it is
open to the respondents to continue the petitioner till the regular candidate
is available. If the petitioner is again sent for at the time of the regular
recruitment to the post, has to be made, it is needless to mention, that the
respondent would sponsor the name of the petitioner also along with other
candidates for being considered afresh. The appeal is accordingly allowed only
to the above extent and a direction is issued. Rule nisi is made absolute. No
costs.
Back