Sukhpal
Singh Vs. Punjab State Agrl. Marketing Board [1994] INSC 457 (7 September 1994)
Ramaswamy,
K. Ramaswamy, K. Venkatachala N. (J)
CITATION:
1994 SCC (6) 320 1994 SCALE (4)285
ACT:
HEAD NOTE:
ORDER
1.
This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Division Bench of
the Punjab & Haryana High Court in CWP No. 388 of 1987 which was dismissed
on 23-11-1987. On 14-9-1985 the Market Committee of Shri Hargobindpur Sahib in Gurdaspur
District had published in the daily newspaper Ajit calling applications to fill
the posts of Auction Recorder, Electrician, Helper, Chowkidar and Clerk etc. It
would appear that on 28-9-1985 a sub-committee was constituted for
selection of the candidates and on the same day selection was done. The General
Body of the Market Committee approved the selection and letters of appointment
were issued From the Judgment and Order dated 23-11-1987 of the Punjab and Haryana
High Court in C.W.P. No. 388 of 1987 321 and the selected candidates had joined
on the same day on regular basis. On 17-1-1987 the Board reviewed the appointments
and terminated their appointments. The appellant challenged the termination
orders. The High Court, as stated earlier, dismissed the writ petition on
diverse grounds. Thus, this appeal by special leave.
2. Shri
K. Madhava Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellants strenuously
contended that the Committee was duly constituted to select the candidates;
advertisement in the local newspaper was made inviting the applications; the
appellants along with others had applied for and were duly selected to the
existing regular posts as on that date and were duly appointed. Though there
was ban on ad hoc or temporary appointments, there was no ban on the
appointment to the regular posts which came to be issued on 18-10-1985 and that therefore, the appointment of the
appellants cannot be said to be irregular or illegal. He also contended that
the cancellation was made by the Board without notice to the appellants and
that therefore, it is violative of not only the regulations, but also the
principles of natural justice.
In the
view we are taking, it is not necessary to consider the questions raised by the
appellants or the grounds on which the High Court affirmed the order of
cancellation of appointments made by the Board.
3.
Subsequent to the cancellation of the appointment of the appellants, on a
regular advertisement candidates were selected, appointments were made and
posts have been filled up. Those candidates have been functioning from 27-5-1987 onwards. They are not before this Court nor are they
sought to be impleaded in the High Court. Therefore, any order that may be
passed by this Court would have adverse effect of unsettling their appointment
without they being impleaded and without any opportunity of hearing given to
them. Under those circumstances, we decline to interfere with the order of the
High Court and the order of the Market Committee cancelling the appointments of
the appellants. However, if any future vacancies were to arise or any existing
for which any regular recruitment is to be made, the appellants may also apply
for and their cases may also be considered along with others according to
rules. In case by that date, they become barred by age, the necessary
relaxation in respect of age may be given and they may also be considered along
with other qualified candidates for selection to regular appointments. Any
payments made for the period during which the appellants were in service from
the date of the appointment till the date of termination and they worked in
that period, there may not be any order for I recovery of the same.
4.
With these observations, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Back
