M A I N   N E W S

Relief to seven PCS officers
Our High Court Correspondent

Chandigarh, January 18
In a relief to seven PCS officers, whose appointment on compassionate grounds had been set aside by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on November 7 last, a Division Bench of the High Court today directed the Punjab Government not to remove these officers from their job till further orders. Taking up an appeal filed by the officers challenging the single Judge’s order, the Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Mr Justice Vijender Jain and Mr Justice Rajive Bhalla, also issued notices for April 18 to the Punjab Government and others.

It may be recalled that in his order of November 7 last, Mr Justice Mahesh Grover, while allowing a bunch of petitions challenging the appointment of these officers on compassionate grounds, had set aside their appointment. The High Court order came over 13 years after these officers were appointed. Among those whose appointment had been challenged was Mr Puneet Goyal, former SDM, Pathankot, who is involved in a case of alleged poaching of peacock. The other officers were Mr Rajeev Parashar, Mr Amar Pal Singh, Ms Babita, Mr Vinay Bablani, Mr Mohinder Pal and Mr Gurpreet Singh Khaira.

Four petitioners, Ms Harjeet Kaur, Dr Harish Malhotra, Mr Naresh Dubey and Mr Harjinder Pal Singh, all of them on the waiting list of the PCS released by the Punjab Public Service Commission (PPSC) in 1992, had challenged the appointment of the kin of seven senior Punjab officers who had been killed in harness during terrorism in Punjab.

The petitioners had stated that the government in violation of the rules could not have made compassionate appointments. They pointed out that even as there was no policy in place at the time of appointment of these officers, a subsequent policy too did not allow the appointment of kin of officers killed by terrorists as Class I officers.

The petitioners had stated that by appointing these persons as PCS officers, the government had deprived them of a chance to make it to the coveted job as no more posts were available.

However, in their appeal, these officers have stated that the state government had the authority under Article 162 of the Constitution to make such appointments. Also, it was within its right to grant relaxation under extraordinary circumstances like the one under reference, in any provision of rules governing appointments, it was further submitted.

Liquor contractors’ plea

A petition filed by the liquor contractors of Nawanshahr came up for hearing before a Division Bench, comprising Mr Justice M.M. Kumar and Mr Justice Rajesh Bindal of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The petitioners have challenged the order of January 9 passed by the District Magistrate, Nawanshahr under Section 144 CrPC.

The order says that no liquor bottle can be sold except on production of identity card, voter identity card/driving licence/passport/ration card and that too after obtaining the signature of the customers in the prescribed format.

Violation of the order would attract punishment under Section 188 of the IPC, which could even be imprisonment.

Appearing for the liquor contractors, the former Advocate General, Haryana, Mr Mohan Jain, argued that as per the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, for a similar violation, there is provision of penalty only. He stated that the order passed by the District Magistrate was a direct infringement of the Act and there was no provision to impose any sentence of imprisonment other than the fine as ordered by the District Magistrate.

Seeking setting aside of the order, Mr Jain also prayed that its implementation be stayed till the disposal of the petition. After hearing him, the Bench issued notice of motion and notice regarding stay to the Chief Secretary, Punjab, the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Punjab and the District Magistrate, Nawanshahr, for February 2.