http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5  

PETITIONER: SARDARA SINGH AND ORS. ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT17/09/1991

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. PUNCHHI, M.M.

CITATION:  1991 AIR 2248            1991 SCR  Supl. (1) 152  1991 SCC  (4) 555        JT 1991 (4)   154  1991 SCALE  (2)616

ACT: Service Law:     The  Punjab  Revenue Patwari Class  III  Service  Rules, 1963:     Rules     2(a),4(1),7:     Notification      dated 26.8.1986---Patwaris--ad-hoc  appointments  --Direction   by Court   to  appoint  regular  Patwaris   within   stipulated period--Service Selection Board not in  existence--Constitu- tion of District Committees--Nomination of members by virtue of    their    offices---Transfer    of    member     before selection---Successor  in office participated in  selection- Selections made on the basis of viva voce only--Validity of.

HEADNOTE:     In  a writ petition decided by the High Court of  Punjab and Haryana, it allowed the ad-hoc appointments made by  the Government  of Punjab to the posts of Patwaris, to  continue for  six months from the date of the judgment  and  directed the  Government  to  make regular  appointment  of  Patwaris within  that  period.  Since the  Service  Selection  Board, Punjab was not constituted at the relevant time, the Govern- ment of Punjab by a Notification dated 26.8.86 amended  Rule 2(a) of the Punjab Revenue Patwari Class III Services Rules, 1963, and empowered the State Government to authorise "other authorities" to make recruitment to the service.  According- ly,  the  Government constituted a selection  committee  for each  district. The District Committee of Patiala  consisted of  the Dy. Commissioner, Patiala as Chairman, and  District Revenue Officer, the District Sainik Welfare Officer and the District  Social  Welfare Officer (Scheduled Caste)  as  its Members.  The  pending names of the  candidates  before  the Service  Selection  Board  were sent to  the  Committee  for selection. The District Collector also invited  applications from  children  affected by the riots at  Delhi,  terrorists affected families in Punjab and the like special categories. By  the date of the interview the District  Revenue  Officer was transferred and his successor participated in the Selec- tion.     The  selections were challenged by  unsuccessful  candi- dates in several writ petitions which were dismissed by  the High  Court. Aggrieved the petitioners filed appeals  before this Court by special leave.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5  

153     It  was contended on behalf of the appellants  that  the selection  was bad because: the Committee was  not  properly constituted;  the  District Collector was not  competent  to invite  applications afresh; written test was abandoned  and only  oral interviews were conducted; no proper  opportunity was  given  to appellants in the interview inasmuch  as  821 candidates were interviewed in 15 hours. It was also  prayed that since the appellants had meanwhile become overage,  the Government should be directed to relax their age and to give appointments to them. Dismissing the appeals, this Courts,     HELD  1.1    On the transfer of the member  having  been nominated  by virtue of his office, the incumbent in  office was  entitled to participate in the selection of the  candi- dates.  The committee constituted was properly  composed  of the representatives enumerated therein, and the selection of the candidates, therefore, was legal and valid. [pp. 155  F- G; 156-A]     1.2 Although the representation of the Scheduled  Castes need be by an officer belonging to Scheduled Caste, and  the District  Social Welfare Officer (Scheduled Caste),  as  re- quired should be an officer belonging to the members of  the Scheduled  Castes,  yet it is not uncommon that  the  Social Welfare  Officer may be an officer other than one  from  the Scheduled Castes. [p. 155 G,H]     2. If applications from candidates are invited and  they are called for interview though under a mistaken  compliance on  wrong  impression, the selection of the  candidates,  so applying, does not become illegal. [p. 156 D]     3.  Normally it may be desirable to conduct written test and  in  particular hand-writing that which is vital  for  a Patwari  whose primary duty is to record clearly entries  in revenue  records followed by oral interview. The  rules  did not  mandate  to  have both. Options were  given  either  to conduct written test or viva voce or both and the  committee adopted viva voce as a method to select the candidates which could not be said to be illegal. [p.157 D-E]     4.  On  an  average three minutes were  spent  for  each candidate  for  selection. Keeping in view  the  facts  that educational  qualifications were apparent from  the  record, the  candidates normally hailing from rural  background  had presumptively good knowledge of rural economy and 154 culture,  under  the circumstances, much time  need  not  be spent  on  each candidate for selection except  asking  some questions  on  general knowledge and aptitude  for  work  as Patwari etc. [p. 157 B-D]     Ashok  Yadav  v. State of Haryana, [1985] Suppl.  1  SCR 657, held-inapplicable.     5. The appellants had taken the chance for selection and they  were not selected on the basis of comparative  merits. Merely  because they were carrying on the litigation,  there could  not  be any justification to give  direction  to  the Government  to  consider  their cases by  relaxing  the  age qualification for appointment as Patwari. [157 F-G]

JUDGMENT:     CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal  Nos.3033-34 of 1989.     From  the  Judgment  and Order dated  28.2.1989  of  the Punjab  Haryana  High Court in C.W.P. No. 7209 of  1987  (in L.P.A. No. 748/87) and C.W.P. No. 7607 of 1987.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5  

                                WITH Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 4483-4485 of 1989.     D.V. Sehgal, R.D.Upadhyaya, Ashok Sharma, Nabhyawala, D.S. Tewatia and Ms. Madhu for the Appellants. Ms.  B. Rana and N.S. Das Behl (for the State) for  the  re- spondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by     K RAMASWAMY, J. Leave granted in Special leave Petitions and heard alongwith the appeals.     Common  questions of facts and law arise in the  appeals and  hence are disposed of by a common judgment. It  is  not necessary  to restate the facts, preceding the  decision  of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Gurjit Singh & Ors. v. State  of  Punjab & Ors. (WP No. 2374 of 1985).  Suffice  to state that the High Court in the said judgment, while allow- ing the ad-hoc appointments made by the Government of Punjab to  the posts of Patwaris under the Punjab  Revenue  Patwari Class  II1  Service Rules, 1963, for short  ’the  Rules’  to continue  for six months, directed the State  Government  to make  regular  appointments  in accordance  with  the  rules within the said period from the date of the judgment or else the ad-hoc arrangement would lapse. Pursuant thereto,  since the Service Selection 155 Board, Punjab was not constituted, the Government of  Punjab by  a notification dated August 26, 1986 amended  rule  2(a) and  empowered the State Govt. to authorise "other  authori- ties"  to make recruitment to the service.  Accordingly  the Govt. constituted a Committee for each District, by proceed- ing dated May 27, 1986 to make selection.  For the  District Committee of Patiala, the Dy. Commissioner, Patiala was  the Chairman,  the District Revenue Officer,  Patiala,  District Sainik Welfare Officer and District ’Social Welfare  Officer (Scheduled  Caste) were nominated as members of the  Commit- tee. to the  pending names of the candidates before the S.S. Board  were sent to the Committee for selection.   The  Dis- trict  Collector invited applications’ from special  catego- ries,  namely,  children  effected by the  riots  at  Delhi, terrorists effected families in Punjab, etc. and issued call letters to 1210 candidates for interview. By the date of the interview Shri Piara Singh, the District Revenue Officer was transferred and his successor had participated in the selec- tion.   Out of 821 candidates appearing for  interview,  189 candidates  were  selected; the list was prepared  in  their order  of  merit;  and the Distt.  Collector  appointed  146 candidates  and sent them for Patwari training and on  their completion of it in a period of one year, they were appoint- ed as Patwaris on probation. The selections were  challenged by unsuccessful candidates in several writ petitions and  by judgment  dated February 28, 1989, the High Court  dismissed the  L.P.  Appeal  and the Writ Petitions.  On  leave  under Article 136, the appeals arise from that batch.     The first contention of the appellants that the  Commit- tee was not properly constituted and, therefore, the  selec- tion of the candidates are invalid has no force. Under  rule 4(1)  of the rules, as per amended rule 2(a)  the  authority authorised  by the Govt. is entitled to make recruitment  to the service of Patwaris.  The Committee constituted consists of Dy. Commissioner as Chairman, the District Revenue  Offi- cer,  Patiala, District Sainik Welfare Officer and  District Social  Welfare Officer (S.C.) as members.  Undoubtedly,  at the time when the Committee was constituted, Piara Singh was the District Revenue Officer. On his transfer, his successor had participated in the selection. We have seen the  notifi- cation. The Distt. Revenue Officer, Patiala was nominated in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5  

official  capacity. Therefore, the member having been  nomi- nated by virtue of his office, the incumbent in office  was, therefore,  entitled to participate in the selection of  the candidates. It is true that the representation of the sched- uled  castes  need be by an officer belonging  to  Scheduled Caste.  The  District  Social  Welfare  Officer   (Scheduled Caste)  as  required should be an officer belonging  to  the members of the scheduled caste. It is not uncommon that  the Social Welfare Officer may be an officer other than one from the  scheduled castes. But here in this case it is  not  the contention that the 156 District  Social Welfare Officer was not a  scheduled  caste officer  representing  the scheduled castes.  Therefore,  we find that the committee constituted was properly composed of the  representatives enumerated therein. The composition  of the  committee and the selection of the  candidates,  there- fore, are legal and valid.     It is next contended that the District Collector was not competent to invite applications afresh and selection of the candidates  from out of those applicants is illegal.  It  is true  that  he is bound by the instructions  issued  by  the Government in Annexure ’D’ wherein it was stated that  since the number of applicants are quite large in number, it would not be necessary to solicit candidate afresh from Employment Exchange or through public advertisement. But in paragraph 4 therein it was stated that priority categories listed in the proceeding dated April 24, 1986 will have to be given prece- dence over candidates from all other sources other than  the regularisation of the existing ad-hoc Patwaris. It had given room  to the District Collector to invite applications  from those  categories.  Though it was a mistaken  compliance  on wrong impression, the selection of the candidates, so apply- ing  does  not become illegal. It was next  contended  that. instead  of calling the applications by publication  in  the newspapers,  only notice was put on the Notice Board of  the Collector’s  office  and  some  candidates  submitted  their applications  in pursuance thereof and that is not a  proper notification.  Though we find that the procedure adopted  by the Collector, in inviting applications is not   ommendable, but  the grievance would be voiced only by the  persons  who did not have the opportunity to make applications within the prescribed period. But no such grievance could be raised  by persons like the appellants.  Under those circumstances, the procedure  adopted, though irregular, does not  vitiate  the selection of candidates, ultimately made by the Committee.     It is next sought to raise a contention that none of the candidates  from the priority categories were  selected  and this  was used only as a lever to invite  applications  from the  candidates other than those, some of which  were  ulti- mately selected and it is irregular. We find no substance in it.  That apart it is a factual position to be  investigated and  that  no such plea was raised nor argued  in  the  High Court.  Therefore, we cannot permit the appellants to  raise this contention for the first time in this Court.     It is next contended that there was no proper opportuni- ty  given to the appellants in the interview. Only 15  hours were  spent to interview 821 candidates and  the  selection, therefore,  is a farce. This contention also was not  raised before  the High Court, but raised in these appeals for  the first  time.  In  the counter filed in this  court,  it  was refuted. It was stated that they had spent 35 hours in total at the rate of 7 hours per day. That 157 means  they  spent 5 days in selecting the  candidates.  The

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5  

selection is for the Patwaris in the Class III service.  The ratio  in Ashok Yadav v. State of Haryana, [1985]  Suppl.  1 SCR 657 has no application to the facts in this case. There- in  the  selection was to the Class I service of  the  State service  and sufficient time was required to interview  each candidate. In this case, on calculation, we found that on an average  three  minutes were spent for  each  candidate  for selection. Rule 7 of the rules provides the  qualifications, namely, pass in the Matriculation or Higher Secondary Exami- nation;  knowledge  in  Hindi and Punjabi  upto  the  Middle Standard  and good knowledge of rural economy  and  culture. The educational qualifications are apparent from record  and need  no  interview in this regard. It could  be  seen  that candidates  normally  hailing  from  rural  backgrounds  had presumptively  good knowledge of rural economy and  culture. Therefore,  there is no need for special emphasis to  ascer- tain their knowledge of the rural economy or culture.  Under those  circumstances  much time need not be  spent  on  each candidate  for  selection except asking  some  questions  on general knowledge and aptitude for work as Patwari etc.     It is then contended that the written test, conducted by the previous Service Selection Board, was abandoned and only oral  interviews were conducted.  The selection,  therefore, is illegal.  Normally it may be desirable to conduct written test and in particular hand writing that which is vital  for a Patwari whose primary duty is to record clearly entries in revenue records followed by oral interview. The rules do not mandate  to have both. Options were given either to  conduct written test or viva voce or both.  In this case the Commit- tee  adopted for viva voca as a method to select the  candi- dates which cannot be said to be illegal.     It is next contended that the appellants have now become over-aged  and that they are 22 in all.   Therefore,  direc- tions  may  be given to the Government to  relax  their  age qualification  and  given appointments to them. We  find  no justification  to  give such a  direction.  Admittedly,  the appellants have taken the chance for selection and they were not selected on the basis of comparative merits.  Therefore, merely  because appellants are carrying on  the  litigation, there  cannot be any justification to give direction to  the Govt. to consider their cases by relaxing the age qualifica- tion for appointment as Patwari.  It is not in dispute  that hundreds  of candidates who could not be selected  would  in that event seek similar relief. Under these circumstances we do  not find any cause to add to the selection and  appoint- ment  of the candidates as Patwaris. The High Court,  though for different reasons, has rightly dismissed the writ  peti- tions.  The appeals are accordingly dismissed,  but  without costs. R.P.                                    Appeals dismissed. 158