Mobile View
Main Search Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 1 docs
Section 173 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973

User Queries
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Major Singh And Others vs Punjab State Power Corporation ... on 3 April, 2013

CWP No.14036 of 2012 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP No.14036 of 2012 (O&M)

Date of decision:03.04.2013

Major Singh and others ....Petitioners Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.

and another ....Respondents

CWP No.17401 of 2012 (O&M)

Gurmeet Singh Madahar ....Petitioner Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.

and another ....Respondents

CWP No.15036 of 2012 (O&M)

Mandeep Singh and others ....Petitioners Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.

and another ....Respondents

CWP No.16065 of 2012 (O&M)

Rajiv Kumar Arora ....Petitioner Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.

and another ....Respondents

CWP No.16073 of 2012 (O&M)

Yashpal Sharma and others ....Petitioners Versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.

and another ....Respondents CWP No.14036 of 2012 (O&M) 2

CWP No.3480 of 2013 (O&M)

Parmod Kumar ...Petitioner

versus

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.

and another ....Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment?

2. To be referred to reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Present:- Mr. Mohit Jaggi, Advocate and Mr. D.S.Patwalia, Advocate with

Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate and

Mr. Bikramjit Singh Patwalia, Advocate for the petitioners in CWP Nos.23723/11, 6065 & 16073 of 2012.

Mr. Harish Goyal, Advocate

for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Jatinder Singh, Advocate

for Mr. Ramandeep Singh Pandhey, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vijay Paul, Advocate

for PSPCL.

Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate

for respondents No.3 to 30.

Ms. Anju Arora, Advocate

for respondent Nos. 3 to 29 in CWP No.14036 of 2012. Mr. Arun Nehra, Advocate

for respondent No.3 in CWP Nos.16065 & 16073 of 2012.

Mr. Girish Agnihotri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Arvind Seth, Advocate

for the respondent PSPCL.

CWP No.14036 of 2012 (O&M) 3

RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J (ORAL)

C.M.No.5306 of 2013

The application is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Annexure A-1 is taken on record.

Main case

As per the averments made, challenge in all these writ

petitions is to the written examination conducted by the respondents

for selection to the posts of Assistant Engineer (On Training

Electrical) and Junior Engineer (Electrical) on the ground that

question paper was leaked and the same has throttled the rights of

the deserving candidates for selection. A further prayer has been

made for directing the respondents to re-conduct the examination for

the aforesaid posts, in a transparent manner after canceling the

examination held on 15.7.2012, with a further prayer that respondent

be directed to get conducted an independent inquiry into the leakage

of question paper on 15.7.2012 or to pass any other order in peculiar

circumstances of the case.

By moving C.M.No.5306 of 2013 in CWP No.14036 of

2012, the respondents has sought to place on record a decision of

the Board of Directors of the Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd in

its Adjourned 25th Meeting held on 25.03.2013 at Mohali.

Vide aforesaid resolution which has been taken on

record, the Board has resolved and further approved the cacellation

of the written test held on 15.7.2012 against advertisement CRA

-276/12 . The relevant part of the aforesaid resolution reads thus:- CWP No.14036 of 2012 (O&M) 4

"EIC/HRD apprised the Board about the details given in the memorandum and the facts that TRANSCO also appointed Edcil for conducting the test for their recruitment after the test conducted by PSPCL and there was no such problem reported. He also apprised that Edcil has not yet been contacted for the test and as such may or may not accept the assignment to conduct the test again. Further, it was also informed that the candidates who will be identified in the final report of DIG/Cyber Crime in misdeed in the earlier written test shall be debarred from appearing in the written test or their result shall not be declared or appointment letters shall not be issued or shall be debarred from appearing further in any test etc. as to be decided by the PSPCL based on further investigation of if appointed will be dismissed if they join the service before the conclusion of investigation. EIC/HRD submitted before the Board that there has been typographic error in the decision required and Para No.14 has been written as Para-13. The Board thereafter passed the following resolution: RESOLVED THAT approval be and is

hereby accorded to cancel the written test conducted on 15.07.2012 against CRA No.276/2012 for the posts of AE/OT(Eect.), AE/OT(Mech), AE/OT (Electronic and Communication), AE/OT (Instrument and Control), AE/OT(Civil), Junior Engineer (Elect.), APA (Elect.) AJS (Elect), APA (Mech.) AJS (Mech.), Supervisor Instrumentation and Junior Engineer (Civil).

FURTHER RESOLVED THAT approval

be and is hereby accorded to recondut the written test for these posts for the already registered CWP No.14036 of 2012 (O&M) 5

candidates against CRA No.276/2012 and various precautions as listed in Para-14 of the Memorandum shall be taken care while conducting the written test.

FURTHER RESOLVED THAT approval

be and is hereby accorded to get the written test conducted and the process of preparation of merit list etc. throug M/s Edcil as they are having the complete database of the existing registered candidates or any other reputed agency. FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Committee of WTD's be and is hereby authorised to finalise/approve the commercial terms with M/s Edcil or any other reputed agency, as the case may be."

Mr. Arvind Seth, Advocate who is assisting the Senior

Counsel Mr. Girish Agnihotri, on instructions from Mr. Rakesh Kumar

Bawa, Deputy Secretary (Recruitment) Power Corporation Ltd.

Patiala, who is present in the Court, has stated that the aforesaid

resolution stands implemented and the aforesaid written test

conducted on 15.7.2012 stands cacelled.

In view of the aforesaid stand taken, this Court is of the

view that all these writ petitions have been rendered infructuous.

Ordered accordingly.

Needless to say, all the pending applications in these writ

petitions also do not survive. However, the selected candidates are

at liberty to challenge the action of the respondents in cancelling the

examination in accordance with law, if so advised, in independent

and appropriate proceedings.

CWP No.14036 of 2012 (O&M) 6

Learned State counsel has also filed status report with

regard to investigation in the FIR No.4 dated 5.3.2013 Police Station

Cyber Crime, Mohali, in a sealed cover and the same is taken on

record.

The Registrar Judicial is directed to keep the aforesaid

status report which is in sealed cover in safe custody till further

orders.

The respondent-State is further directed to complete the

investigation in the aforesaid FIR and file the report under Section

173 Cr.P.C as expeditiously as possible .

Compliance report/status report be filed on or before

31st July, 2013.

April 03, 2013 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) savita JUDGE