SUKHPAL SINGH AND ORS. versus PUNJAB STATE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD AND ORS.

Citation: [1994] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 204 · Decided: 07-09-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, N. VENKATACHALA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
SUKHPAL SINGH AND ORS. 
. v. 
PUNJAB STATE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD 
AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 7, 1994 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.) 
SelVice Law: Selection-Appointments-Review and tennination of ap-
pointmen~Selection on appointment of candidates subsequent to cancella-
C tion of earlier appointments-Challenge to tennination orders-Candidates 
selected subsequently not impleaded as parties-Held in the circumstances 
inteif erence with cancellation order is not called for-Directions by Supreme 
Coult. 
The. Market Committee of Shri Hargobindpur Sahib Gurdaspur 
D made certain appointments. The General Body of the Market Committee· 
approved the selection and the selected candidate also joined their duties. 
Subsequently the Board reviewed the selection and terminated their ap-
pointments. Subsequent to the cancellation of the appointments, on a 
regular advertisement candidates were selected, appointments' were made 
E and posts were filed up. The appellants challenged the termination order 
but the High Court dismissed their petition. The appellants preferred 
appeal in this Court. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court 
F 
HELD : 1. In the circumstances of the case, interference with the 
order cancelling the appointments of the appellants is not called for. 
Subsequent to the cancellation of the appointment of the appellants, on 
regular advertisement candidates were selected, appointments were made 
and posts have been filled up. They are neither before this Court nor are 
G 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. (206-D-C] 
2. However, for any future vacancies the appellants may also apply 
H for and their cases may also be considered along with others according to 
204 
.. 
SUK.HP AL SINGH v. PB. STATE AGRI. MKG. BOARD 
205 
rules. In cases by that date, they become barred by age, the necessary A 
relaxation in respect of age may be given. Any payment made for the period 
during with the appellants were in service from the date of the appointment 
till the date of termination may not be recovered. [206-E-F] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4042 of 
1989. 
B 
From the Judgment and Order dated 23.11.87 of the Punjab & 
Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 388 of 1987. 
K. Madhava Reddy, H.S. Munjral, S.S. Rana and Mrs. B. Rana for 
the Appellants. 
C 
Muni Lal Verma Seeraj Bagga for Mrs. S. Bagga for the Respon-
dents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
This appeal by special leave arises from the Judgment of the Division 
Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 388/1987 which 
was dismissed on November 23, 1987. On September 14, 1985 the Market 
Committee of Shri Hargobindpur Sahib in Gurdaspur District had publish-
D 
ed in the daily new paper 'Ajit' calling applications to fill the post of E 
Auction Recorder, Electrician, Helper, Chowkidar and Clerk etc. It would 
appear that on September 28, 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 and the selected candidates had joined on the 
same day on regular basis. On January 17, 1987 the Board reviewed the F 
appointments and terminated their appointments The appellant Chal-
lenged the termination orders. The High Court, as stated earlier, dismissed 
the Writ Petition on diverse grounds. Thus, this appeal by special leave. 
Shri K. Madhava Reddy, the learned senior counsel for the appel-
lants strenuously contended that the Committee was duly constituted to G 
select the candidates; advertisement in the local newspaper was made 
inviting the appellication; the appellants along with others had applied for 
and duly selected to the existing regular posts as on that date and were 
duly appointed. Though there was ban on adhoc or temporary appoint-
ments, there was no ban on the appointment to the regular posts which H 
'f 
206 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994) SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A 
came to be issued on October 18, 1985 and that therefore, the appointment 
of the appellants cannot be said to be irregular or illegal. He also con-
tended that the cancellation was made by the Board without notice to the 
appellants and that therefore, it is violative of not

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.