REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5589-5605 of 2014

JOGINDER PAL & ORS. ETC. .....APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S)

W I T H

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5606-5608 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5609-5611 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5612 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5613 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5614-5621 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5622 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5623 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5624 OF 2014

J U D G M E N T

A.K. SIKRI, J.

One Mr. Ravinderpal Singh Sidhu was the

Chairman of the Punjab Public Service Commission (for short,

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 1 of 39

'PSC') between 1996-2002. During his tenure as the Chairman,

some appointments were made in the Executive Class–I between

1998-2001, by way of direct recruit as well as by nomination, as

provided in the Rules. Appointments of judicial officers were also

made in four batches within the same period. On getting tip to the

effect that for making such appointments Mr. Sidhu had received

bribe from many people, raids were conducted in his house

sometime in the year 2002, on more than one occasion. A huge

sum of money, i.e., Rs. 16 crores (approximately), was recovered

from his custody and from other relatives of Mr. Sidhu. This led to

lodging of the First Information Reports (FIRs) against him,

leading to criminal prosecution primarily under the provisions of

the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In these FIRs, some of

the officers of the Executive Branch and Allied Services of the

Punjab Civil Service (for short, ‘PCS’) were also implicated.

Smelling rat in the appointments in the PCS Executive Branch and

Allied Services Branch, as well as judicial appointments, result

sheets of the nominated candidates and the answer sheets of

PCS Executive Branch and Allied Services Branch were seized.

On going through the same, Vigilance Bureau of the State of

Punjab informed the Chief Secretary, Punjab that most of the

examinations held during the tenure of Mr. Sidhu were tainted.

This led to spate of actions taken by the State Government. In the

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 2 of 39

first instance, the services of all officers in the category of

Nominated Executive Officers, who were about to complete their

period of probation, were terminated on May 23, 2002. This was

done by passing orders of termination simpliciter purporting to be

in terms of Rules, i.e., by terminating the probation. Thereafter,

vide orders dated August 24, 2002, services of the direct recruits,

Executive Class-I and II were terminated by way of dismissal on

the premise that criminal prosecution had been launched against

Mr. Sidhu. So far as judicial officers are concerned, the Chief

Justice of the High Court constituted a Committee to go into the

allegations and also the news items appearing in the media

alleging that wards of some sitting Judges of the Punjab and

Haryana High Court had been favoured by the Chairman of the

PSC. The said Committee submitted its report recommending

cancellation of all the appointments of the judicial officers who

were recruited in four batches from 1998 till 2002. This report was

accepted by the Full Court and was sent to the Government.

Initially, the Government of Punjab raised a query as to what was

the basis for recommendation of cancellation of appointments of

the 1998 batch candidates, as selection of that batch was not in

question. Another Committee was constituted and on the basis of

report, which was approved by the Full Court, recommendation

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 3 of 39

was reiterated. As a consequence, the services of all these

judicial officers also came to be terminated.

2)All these persons, who services had been terminated, belonging

to Executive, Allied Services as well as Judicial Branches,

challenged these actions by filing writ petitions in the High Court.

We describe hereinbelow the manner in which the cases of

Executive and Allied Services Branches were dealt with and the

outcome thereof, as in the present case we are concerned with

the officers of PCS Executive Branch and Allied Services Branch.

However, since the judgment rendered by this Court in respect of

termination of judicial officers has some bearing on the present

case, we shall take note of the outcome of the cases filed by the

judicial officers as well.

3)Insofar as PCS Executive Branch and Allied Services Branch

are concerned, a large number of writ petitions were filed by

almost all the officers whose services were terminated; be it direct

recruits or nominated officers. The matter was referred to the Full

Bench, having regard to the importance of the question of law

involved. The Full Bench presided by the then Chief Justice of the

High Court and two senior most Judges, after hearing these

petitions at length, decided those writ petitions by judgment dated

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 4 of 39

July 07, 2003, which is reported as Amarbir Singh & Ors. v.

State of Punjab & Ors., 2003 (5) SLR 398. By means of this

judgment, the Full Bench dismissed all the writ petitions, thereby

confirming the action of the State Government terminating the

services of all the officers of PCS Executive Branch and Allied

Services Branch as well as the judicial officers. As per the High

Court, the decision of the Government to terminate the services

was because of the reason that the entire selection process in

respect of PCS Executive Branch and Allied Services Branch was

so tainted and vitiated, the Government was left with no alternative

but to declare the entire selection as null and void. The case set

up by the State of Punjab was that during his tenure as Chairman

of PSC from September 1996 to March 26, 2002, Mr. Sidhu

completely usurped the powers of the Commission unto himself,

to the exclusion of all other members, and manipulated the system

for ensuring the selection of those who had paid money or came

with the recommendations. It had relied upon the statements of

Mr. Jagman Singh, a confident and tout of Mr. Sidhu (who had

become approver in the criminal case), who disclosed the modus

operandi adopted by Mr. Sidhu. It was pointed out that during the

investigation it was revealed that question papers and answer

scripts were smuggled out of the headquarters of the PSC. At

times, blank answer sheets were given to the prospective

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 5 of 39

candidates and special instructions were given to the examiners

towards higher marks to favoured candidates and at the same

time less marks were awarded to more meritorious candidates.

By accepting the bribes to favour such persons, Mr. Sidhu had

amassed assets worth Rs. 22 crores. It was averred that the

entire selection process was completely vitiated and it was not

possible to separate the meritorious candidates from others and,

therefore, a decision was taken to terminate all the appointments.

4)The High Court, after examining the matter, accepted the

aforesaid argument of the State Government to the effect that it

was not possible to segregate the tainted candidates from

untainted ones, leaving no option for the State Government but to

cancel the entire selection process. Few judgments of this Court

were relied upon to hold that in such circumstances, when the

selection process is found to be vitiated, the Administration had a

right to cancel the selection process and while doing so it was not

necessary to adhere to the principles of natural justice, which had

no role to play in matters like these.

5)Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment in Amarbir Singh’s case

(supra), all these officers whose services were terminated

approached this Court. Special leave was granted in all these

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 6 of 39

petitions and civil appeals were heard and decided by this Court,

with lead case known as Inderpreet Singh Kahlon & Ors. v.

State of Punjab, (2006) 11 SCC 356. Since this judgment is

sheet anchor of the appellants before us, in the second round of

litigation, we would like to take note of this judgment in some

detail.

6)It can be easily guessed, as it is so obvious, that the case of the

appellants in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon’s case (supra) was that

the action of the State Government and the stamp of approval of

the High Court in cancelling the entire selection process was

impermissible. The appellants therein had argued that there was

no basis for such a finding, namely, the entire selection process

had been vitiated and it was necessary for the Government to

separate cases of tainted persons from non-tainted ones and to

take action against only those who were tainted. It was argued

that by not undertaking such an exercise and clubbing together

tainted as well as non-tainted persons, two unequal classes were

clubbed together thereby meting out discriminatory treatment qua

those who were without blemish and it amounted to violation of

Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The appellants in

the said case had also argued that while holding that entire

selection process was vitiated by corruption and cancelling the

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 7 of 39

same after appointees had put in few years of service, the High

Court had applied the principle of ‘mass cheating cases’, which

principle was applicable only in the cases of examination in

academic institutions and not the examination for the purpose of

public employment. Pertinently, this Court generally accepted the

aforesaid submissions of the appellants. From the reading of the

judgment, one can discern the following principles:

(a) An appointment made in violation of Articles 14 and 16

of the Constitution of India would be void. It would be a nullity.

Since the services of the appellants were terminated not in terms

of the rules but in view of the commission of illegality in the

selection process involved, the applicability of the relevant

provisions of the statutes as also the effect of the provisions of

Article 311 of the Constitution need not be considered.

(b) Before a finding that an appointment has been made

in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution can be arrived

at, the appointing authority must take into consideration the

foundational facts. Only when such foundational facts are

established, can the legal principles be applied. When the

services of employees are terminated inter alia on the ground that

they might have aided and abetted corruption and, thus, either for

the sake of probity in governance or in public interest their

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 8 of 39

services should be terminated, the court must satisfy itself that

conditions therefor exist. The court while setting aside a selection

may require the State to establish that the process was so tainted

that the entire selection process is liable to be cancelled. In a

case of this nature, thus, the question which requires serious

consideration is as to whether due to the misdeed of some

candidates, honest and meritorious candidates should also suffer.

(c) A distinction exists between a proven case of mass

cheating for a board examination and an unproven imputed

charge of corruption where the appointment of a civil servant is

involved. Only in the event it is found to be impossible or highly

improbable that the tainted cases can be separated from the non-

tainted cases could en masse orders of termination be issued.

Both the State Government as also the High Court in that view of

the matter should have made all endeavours to segregate the

tainted from the non-tainted candidates.

(d) Cases which may arise where the selection process is

perceived to be tainted may be categorised in the following

manner:

(i)Cases where the “event” has been investigated.

(ii)Cases where CBI inquiry took place and was completed

or a preliminary investigation was concluded.

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 9 of 39

(iii)Cases where the selection was made but

appointment was not made.

(iv)Cases where the candidates were also ineligible

and the appointments were found to be contrary to

law or rules.

If the services of appointees who had put in a few

years of service were terminated, compliance with three principles

at the hands of the State was imperative viz.: (1) to establish

satisfaction in regard to the sufficiency of the materials collected

so as to enable the State to arrive at its satisfaction that the

selection process was tainted; (2) to determine the question that

the illegalities committed went to the root of the matter, which

vitiated the entire selection process. Such satisfaction as also the

sufficiency of materials were required to be gathered by reason of

a thorough investigation in a fair and transparent manner; (3)

whether the sufficient material present enabled the State to arrive

at a satisfaction that the officers in majority had been found to be

part of the fraudulent purpose or the system itself was corrupt.

(e) Once the necessary factual findings as enumerated

above are arrived at, or it is found impossible or highly improbable

to separate tainted from untainted cases, all appointments

traceable to the officers concerned could be cancelled. But

admittedly, in the present case, although there had been serious

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 10 of 39

imputations against Ravinderpal Singh Sidhu being at the helm of

the affairs of the State Public Service Commission, all decisions

made by the Commission during his tenure are yet to be set aside.

7)Applying these principles to the facts of the case, the Court

found that no candidate for the year 2001 had been appointed

and, therefore, persons who were selected in that year were on a

different footing as merely a person comes in the selected list, he

has no right to be appointed on that ground. However, held the

Court, those who had already been appointed and had completed

about three years of service, some of them had even passed

departmental test and some were given higher responsibilities and

had even completed the period of probation or nearing the

completion thereof and were working to the satisfaction of the

authorities concerned, different yardsticks were to be applied while

terminating their services. As a matter of fact, the Court found

that apart from inferences drawn on certain facts and in particular

the circumstances enumerated by the High Court, it was difficult to

accept the contention of the State Government that it was

absolutely impossible for it to separate the innocent candidates

from the tainted ones. In the opinion of the Court, by appointing

an independent scrutiny committee it was still possible to sift the

evidence and separate tainted candidates from the innocent ones.

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 11 of 39

The Court also recorded that relevant records were still available

and had not been destroyed, which included question papers,

answer sheets and other documents. Since these records were

still available, a fair investigation into the whole affair was still

possible. Such an exercise was, therefore, needed when it had

not been found that all the appointments were made on

extraneous considerations, including monetary consideration. It

was, thus, held that the High Court was not right in applying the

principle of ‘mass cheating cases’ in the instant case. The Court

concluded the matter in the following manner:

(a) If services of appointees who had put in a few years of

service are to be terminated, compliance with following principles

by State is imperative: (1) sufficient materials are to be collected,

to be gathered by thorough investigation in fair and transparent

manner; (2) illegalities committed must go to the root of the

matter, vitiating entire selection process; and (3) the

appointees/officers in majority must be found to be part of the

fraudulent purpose or the system itself must be found to be

corrupt.

(b) In the present case, above principles not having been

adhered to and since it could not be said that a fair investigation

into the suspected selection process to the Punjab PCS for the

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 12 of 39

years 1998-2001 was an impossible task, or despite availability of

a large part of the records a thorough investigation had been

made so as to arrive at a satisfaction that the entire selection

process suffered from a large-scale fraud, High Court was not

right in applying the principle of mass cheating cases in the instant

case and approve the en masse termination of services of the

appellants by the State.

(c) Impugned orders of State Government and High Court

were set aside. Matters were remitted to High Court for

consideration afresh, status quo to be maintained in the

meantime. High Court was directed to constitute two independent

Scrutiny Committees, one relating to the executive officers and the

other to the judicial officers. Various directions were given for

functioning of said Committees and expeditious disposal of the

matters, and State was directed to file report in this Court in each

individual case. It was further directed to unearth the scam and

spare no officer involved in wrongdoing, howsoever high he may

be.

8)Dealing with the case of judicial officers whose services were

terminated, the Court took the view that they had not been fairly

treated by the High Court and deserved better treatment. In their

cases also the Court directed fresh inquiry. That aspect we would

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 13 of 39

discuss in detail at the appropriate stage as in the present case

we are not concerned with the cases of judicial officers.

9)After the judgment in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon’s case

(supra), a Committee of three Judges of the High Court was

constituted with the specified task to separate the tainted

candidates from the non-tainted candidates selected to the

executive post by the PSC. The said Committee undertook the

mammoth and painstaking task with deep scrutiny of the case of

each and every candidate. This Committee submitted its report

dated February 08, 2007. It is pertinent to note that the

Committee could achieve the task of segregating tainted

candidates from the innocent ones, meaning thereby the

Committee could pinpoint those candidates who had got selected

were selected for oblique considerations. It meant that others

against whom no such taint was found had been selected on their

own merit and performance in the written examination as well as

viva voce. That is the reason that these candidates were put in

non-tainted category. However, even when the Committee was

able to achieve this result, as mandated by this Court in

Inderpreet Singh Kahlon’s case (supra), the Committee also

went into another aspect, namely, whether it could be stated that

the process of selection could be described as fraudulent, tainted

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 14 of 39

and arbitrary. Looking into the matter from this angle, the

Committee came to the conclusion that the entire processes of

selections to the premier executive post was carried out by a well-

planned scheme of deception, forgery and fraud and, therefore,

deserved to be set aside in their entirety. The final analysis of the

report dated February 08, 2007 is as under:

“Firstly, it is possible to infer that in the processes of

selection to which the present investigation is limited,

there were 40 tainted candidates. This inference would,

however, be subject to an opportunity to be afforded to

them during the course of re-hearing of the matter on the

judicial side, in terms of the direction of the Apex Court

in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon’s case (supra).

Secondly, the process of selection under reference

(within the ambit of investigation of the Vigilance

Department), can be described as fraudulent, tainted

and arbitrary. The said processes of selection were

clearly rifle and abounding with manipulations, carried

out by a well planned scheme of deception, forgery and

fraud; executed for showing favour, or for consideration.

And as such, the entire processes of selection, to the

premier executive posts, which were subject matter of

investigation at the hands of the Vigilance Department,

deserve to be set aside in their entirety.”

10)In the light of this report, the original writ petitions were reheard,

as a result of remand of these cases to the High Court, as directed

in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon’s case (supra). Matter was

referred to the five Judge Bench of the High Court. The High

Court has accepted the report thereby giving its approval to that

part of the report as well which has treated the entire selection

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 15 of 39

process to be vitiated. As a result, all the writ petitions are

dismissed again vide judgment of the Full Bench rendered on May

31, 2013.

11)Insofar as those cases wehre the petitioners were found to be

tainted candidates, after the scrutiny by the Committee, the

obvious result was that the writ petitions were dismissed on this

ground. However, even in respect of non-tainted candidates, the

High Court has held that it was permissible for the Government to

cancel the entire selection process, once it is found that the

process of selection itself is a result of manipulations carried out

by a well-planned scheme of deception, forgery and fraud.

12)We will proceed to discuss the cases of tainted and non-tainted

candidates seperately.

TAINTED CANDIDATES

13)The particulars of candidates who are facing criminal trial are

as under:

S.No

.

Case No.

Name

Remarks

1.CA Nos. 5606-5608/2014

Jiwan Kumar Garg

Kamal Kumar

PCS (EB) Direct

2.CA No. 5622/2014 P.S. Sodhi PCS Nominated

3.CA Nos. 5614-5621/2014O.P. Verma PCS Nominated

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 16 of 39

Inderdeep Kahlon

Jasbir Singh Toor

H.L. Bansal

Parvinderpal Singh

Jarnail Singh

Balraj Kaur

Rajinder Sidhu

4.CA No. 5623/2013 Bhupinderjit Singh PCS Nominated

14)As far as these cases are concerned, they hardly pose any

challenge. As it is specifically found that the aforesaid persons

have indulged in unfair means and have been selected either by

paying bribe or because of other extraneous reasons and not on

their merit, their writ petitions have been rightly dismissed by the

High Court. It was argued by Mr. Manoj Swarup, learned counsel

appearing for these appellants, that those who are facing trial may

be acquitted after investigation. Likewise, some of those who are

even convicted, their appeals are pending and there is a possibility

that their appeals are allowed thereby setting aside the conviction.

Therefore, such a decision to terminate their services could not

have been taken at this stage.

This argument is totally unimpressive and does

not hold any water. Such candidates who were selected with

unfair and illegal means cannot have the audacity to say that they

should be reinstated in service and allowed to continue till their

appeals are decided. In any case, having found that they are

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 17 of 39

tainted candidates and their entry into public service was soiled,

the decision to terminate their services becomes perfectly justified.

In respect of these appellants, the High Court has found that FIRs

have been registered against them and they definitely carry a

trace, stain or blemish that they were tainted. FIRs were

registered when during investigation the Vigilance Bureau

recorded statements of Mr. Sudhu, Jagman Singh and Randhir

Singh Gill under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. The modus

operandi of conducting the manipulations in the written

examination was disclosed by them. Question papers were given

to Mr. Jagman Singh to be shown to the candidates who were to

appear in the written examination conducted by the PSC. The

same were to be collected from the official residence of Mr. Sidhu,

i.e. House No. 914, Sector-39, Chandigarh, and some times to be

collected from Mrs. Pritpal Kaur, the mother of Mr. Sidhu from

House No. 549, Sector-10, Chandigarh. Candidates were then

shown these question papers during the night preceding the

examination at the residence of Mr. Jagman Singh. The above

procedure was also followed at the residence of the mother of Mr.

Sidhu. Mr. Jagman Singh was deputed to the residences of

influential persons for showing the question papers to the

concerned candidates.

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 18 of 39

In this backdrop, the High Court rightly covered these

persons as tainted persons, ascribing following meaning to the

expression 'taint':

“The word 'taint' as per the New Shorter Oxford English

Dictionary (Vol.-II) can be expressed to mean a trace,

'stain' or a 'blemish'. It denotes some evil quality, a

contaminating or corrupting influence. It can lead to mean

an imbue with any thing objectionable or to contaminate or

infect. The word 'taint' when used as a verb means

dishonest, destroy integrity, vitiate, tarnish and degenerate

morally.”

Therefore, all these appeals are dismissed,

except Civil Appeal No. 5606 of 2014 filed by one Randeep Singh,

inasmuch as against him no case is registered as he is ultimately

found innocent. We shall deal with his case along with non-

tainted candidates.

NON-TAINTED CANDIDATES/DIRECT RECRUITMENT

15)The particular of those appellants who fall in this category of

non-tainted candidates are as under:

S.No

.

Case No.

Name

Remarks

1.CA No. 5589/2014

Joginder Pal

Balkaran Singh

Shishpal

Mandeep Singh

Baljinder Singh

Gurdev Singh

Ramesh Kumar

Tehsildar

2.CA No. 5590/2014 Sarabjot Singh Sidhu ETO

3.CA No. 5591/2014 Harcharan Singh PCS (EB)

4.CA No. 5592/2014 Amarjit Singh PCS (EB)

5.CA No. 5593/2014 Gurjit Singh PCS (EB)

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 19 of 39

6.CA No. 5594/2014 Jagjit Singh PCS (EB)

7.CA No. 5595/2014 Anita Darshi PCS (EB)

8.CA No. 5596/2014 Jaspal Singh Gill PCS (EB)

9.CA No. 5597/2014

Rajan Sharma

Prabhjot Singh

Dilbagh Singh

EO

10.CA No. 5598/2014 Balwinder Singh AR

11.CA No. 5599/2014 Raj Singh DFSO

12.CA No. 5600/2014 Rupinder Pal Singh PCS (EB)

13.CA No. 5601/2014 Monish Kumar PCS (EB)

14.CA No. 5602/2014

Rajesh Dhiman

Harsuhinder Pal Singh

PCS (EB)

15.CA No. 5603/2014 Paramjit Singh PCS (EB)

16.CA No. 5604/2014 Surinder Kaur PCS (EB)

17.CA No. 5605/2014 Manpreet Kaur ETO

18.CA No. 5612/2014 Rubinderjit Singh Brar PCS (EB)

19.CA No. 5613/2014 Sukhpreet Singh Sidhu PCS (EB)

20.CA No. 5609-5611/2014

Amit Talwar

Rajdeep Brar

Gaurav Duggal

Ramandeep Pandher

PCS (EB)

PCS (EB)

AR

AR

21CA No. 5624/2014 Bikramjit Shergill PCS (EB)

Before discussing these cases, we would like to have

a peek into the Report of the Committee dated February 08, 2007,

which is placed on record.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE DATED FEBRUARY 08, 2007

16)The report starts with noticing the directives of this Court in

Inderpreet Singh Kahlon’s case (supra). It specifically

mentions that to implement the directions contained in the said

judgment, the then Acting Chief Justice had constituted a

Committee of three Judges “to submit a report, on the basis of

investigations carried out by officers of the State Government, so

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 20 of 39

as to separate the tainted candidates from the non-tainted

candidates, selected to executive posts by the Punjab Public

Service Commission, during the Chairmanship of Shri

Ravinderpal Singh Sidhu”. Thus, the Committee knew the scope

of exercise which it was to carry out, namely, to separate the

tainted candidates from the non-tainted candidates. This aspect is

thereafter gone into in detail with in-depth scrutiny and analysis of

the records and material placed before it, which not only pertained

to the selection process, i.e. question and answer sheets, etc., but

also records which surfaced during investigation into the FIRs filed

against Mr. Sidhu and other persons, including some of those who

were the selected candidates. No doubt, it was a mammoth task

and it goes to the credit of the Committee that it could successfully

achieve the same. After detailed and thorough analysis of all

cases individually, the Committee was able to separate grain from

the chaff, notwithstanding some handicaps which came its way

and are specifically pointed out in the Report.

17)The following observations, after noticing and examining each

case individually and separately, need a reproduction as it depicts

the state of mental and physical exercise carried out by the

Committee:

“8. Having narrated and summarized the factual

sequence emerging from the investigation carried out by

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 21 of 39

the officers of the Vigilance Department, the next step is

to record conclusions. Before attempting to record our

conclusions, we have considered it appropriate to deal

with. (sic) The veracity of the statements of Shri

Jagman Singh son of Shri Autar Singh Sekhon, and Shri

Randhir Singh Gill son of Shri Kirpal Singh as their

statements are likely to have a strong bearing on the

eventual outcome of the task entrusted to us.

Accordingly, we have examined the veracity of their

statements in sub-paragraph (A), hereunder. In this

paragraph, it is also necessary to examine the

handicaps, which confronted the Investigating Agency

during the course of its deliberation. The Committee on

several occasions felt that on some aspects, further

material should have been collected during the course of

investigation. These handicaps have been summarized

in sub-paragraph (B) hereunder. In rendering our

conclusions, based on the investigation process carried

on by the Vigilance Department of the State Government

we have in sub-paragraph (C), hereunder, carried out

the task of identifying the tainted candidates i.e. the

candidates who, according to the Investigating Agency,

are shown to have managed and manipulated their

recommendations at the hands of the Punjab Public

Service Commission, for reasons other than, or in

addition to their own merit. In sub-paragraph (D), we

have recorded our conclusions in terms of the

parameters expressed in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon’s

case (supra) i.e.: whether or not it is possible to

separately identify the tainted candidates from the

untainted candidates, and if not, whether there is

sufficient material gathered by the Investigating Agency

to conclude, that the entire process of selection was

bad, as such, deserved to be set aside in terms of the

parameters laid down in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon’s case

(supra).”

18)Further discussion ensued on the aforesaid parameters and in

para 8(C) appears the list of 40 persons who, as per the

investigation carried out by the Vigilance Department and the

compilation made by the Committee, ensured their selection by

way of manipulation. Out of these who have approached this

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 22 of 39

Court, their cases have already been dealt with in the first

category resulting in the dismissal of their appeals. The

Committee, thus, found that others, namely, the appellants herein,

were not tainted. It thereafter proceeded further to deal with

another aspect, namely, whether the entire selection process

could be said to be vitiated.

19)The Committee has recorded its reasons for the aforesaid

answer/conclusion and concluded at the end that the processes of

selection were clearly rife and abounding with manipulations,

carried out by a well-planned scheme of deception, forgery and

fraud; executed for showing favour or for consideration. As such,

the Committee opined that the entire processes of selection

deserved to be set aside in their entirety.

IMPUGNED JUDGMENT

20)After taking note of the seminal facts relating to the raids on

Mr. Sidhu, the judgment discusses the importance of PSCs, their

role and their duties, responsibilities as well as expectation of a

common man who is, as per the Preamble to the Constitution of

India, entitled to equality of status and opportunities. Thereafter, it

poses three questions which needed consideration by the Court as

under:

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 23 of 39

“1) Whether 23 selected candidates who are facing

criminal trial can be described to be tainted:?

2) Whether the selection of other candidates who are

not facing criminal trial can be described to be vitiated,

in view of the detailed investigation carried out by

Punjab Vigilance Bureau?

3) Whether the State Government was fair in giving

chance of second examination in 2003 to all the

candidates?”

Insofar as the first question is concerned, we

have already dealt with and discussed the same while dealing with

the first category of cases. It is the second question which

concerns this Court at this juncture.

21)After taking note of and discussing various judgments where

the Court upheld the action of the Government in cancelling the

selection process when found to be vitiated on account of not

following the procedure of selection, smacks of mala fides and

malpractices, the Full Bench held that here also the entire process

suffered from manipulations and was to be treated as vitiated.

OUR CONCLUSION AND REASONS IN SUPPORT

22)From the Report of the Committee dated February 08, 2007,

constituted on the directions of this Court in the case of

Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra), which has been accepted by

the High Court, it is apparent that the Committee has not found

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 24 of 39

anything against these 21 persons, in respect of whom we are

deliberating on the issue involved. At the same time, on going

through the process, the Committee was of the view that the

selection process was vitiated and, therefore, the result warranted

to be cancelled in its entirety, including that of these non-tainted

persons as well.

23)The question that falls for consideration is as to whether the

entire process could be labelled as vitiated because of purported

manipulations, forgery and fraud? Or, to put it otherwise, once the

non-tainted persons are segregated from tainted ones, would it

still be justified to quash the entire selection, even when non-

tainted made into the service because of their merit?

24)It was argued by Mr. Raju Ramachandran and Mr. Gurminder

Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, that

the mandate of Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra) was limited to

one aspect only, namely, to segregate the cases of tainted

candidates from non-tainted ones, if it was possible. It was their

submission that after this task was successfully accomplished by

the Committee, there was no occasion to go into the second

aspect, which was not part of any direction of this Court in

Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra). It was further argued that

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 25 of 39

the findings on two aspects are self-contradictory. Once it was

accepted that some of the candidates were innocent, who entered

the service by virtue of their merit and not because of any

extraneous considerations and these candidates should be

segregated as well, such a finding to the effect on the second

aspect that the entire selection process was vitiated could not be

arrived at.

25)We find force in the aforesaid argument advanced by the

learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant in these set of

appeals.The two conclusions of the High Court appear to be

antithetical. Once it is found that segregating tainted from non-

tainted is possible and is achieved also, other conclusion is

incompatible with the first one.

26)We have already narrated the background in which judgment in

Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra) was rendered by this Court.

Those were the appeals filed against the Full Bench judgment in

Amarbir Singh (supra) where the Court had held that the action

of the Government in cancelling the entire selection process was

justified. This very conclusion of the Full Bench was challenged

by the appellants in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra) with

specific plea that it was not a case for cancelling the entire

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 26 of 39

selection process and, in the first instance, the Court should have

attempted to find out as to whether cases of the candidates who

were tainted could be segregated from those who were

unblemished. The court was convinced with the submission. While

setting aside the judgment and remanding the case back, the

Court went to the extent of holding that by clubbing together

tainted as well as non-tainted persons, two unequal classes were

clubbed together and it amounted to violation of Articles 14 and 16

of the Constitution of India. It was also held that no attempt was

made in this direction, namely, whether there was a possibility of

segregating the two classes of persons. The Court found that as

the relevant records were still available a fair investigation into the

whole affair was possible. We would like to reproduce hereunder

some portions of the judgment of S.B. Sinha, J. in Inderpreet

Singh Kahlon (supra) touching upon this aspect:

“43. Apart from inferences drawn on certain facts and in

particular the circumstances enumerated by the High

Court which have been repeated by the learned counsel

for the State before us, it is difficult to accept that it was

demonstrated by the State that it was absolutely

impossible for it to separate the innocent people from

the tainted ones.

xx xx xx

45. If fraud in the selection process was established,

the State should not have offered to hold a reselection.

Seniority of those who were reselected ordinarily could

not have been restored in their favour. Such an offer

was evidently made as the State was not sure about the

involvement of a large number of employees.

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 27 of 39

46. A distinction moreover exists between a proven

case of mass cheating for a board examination and an

unproven imputed charge of corruption where the

appointment of a civil servant is involved.

xx xx xx

50. In those cases also tainted cases were separated

from the non-tainted cases. Only, thus, in the event it is

found to be impossible or highly improbable, could en

masse orders of termination have been issued.

51. Both the State Government as also the High Court

in that view of the matter should have made all

endeavours to segregate the tainted from the non-

tainted candidates.

xx xx xx

59. In a case of this nature, thus, the question which

requires serious consideration is as to whether due to

the misdeed of some candidates, honest and meritorious

candidates should also suffer.”

27)After noticing the aforesaid features, the directions which are

given for setting up of the Committee to go into the issue are

contained in para 94, which reads as under:

“94. The impugned judgment as also the orders of the

State Government and the High Court are, thus, liable to

be set aside and directions are issued. Although the

impugned judgments cannot be sustained, we are of the

opinion that the interest of justice would be subserved if

the matters are remitted to the High Court for

consideration of the mattes afresh. However, with a

view to segregate the tainted from the non-tainted, and

that in the interest of justice the High Court should be

requested to constitute two independent Scrutiny

Committees – one relating to the executive officers and

the other relating to the judicial officers.”

28)It becomes crystal clear that the concern of the Court was that

for the misdeeds of some candidates, honest and meritorious

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 28 of 39

candidates should not suffer. Therefore, endeavour should be

made to segregate the tainted candidates from those who were

without any stigma and had been selected because of their sheer

merit and not on account of any illegal considerations. We would

also like to reproduce some of the parts of the concurring

judgment authored by Justice Dalveer Bhandari (as His Lordship

then was) with the aforesaid message, eloquently and impeccably:

“118.Undoubtedly, in the selection process, there

have been manipulations and irregularities at the behest

of R.S. Sidhu, the then Chairman, Punjab Public Service

Commission. On careful scrutiny of the facts and

circumstances of the case, in my considered opinion, the

High Court ought to have made a serious endeavour to

segregate the tainted from the non-tainted candidates.

Though the task was certainly difficult, but by no stretch

of imagination, it was not an impossible task.

xx xx xx

124.The High Court has not considered the case in

the proper perspective. The consequences of en masse

cancellation would carry a big stigma particularly on

cancellation of the selections which took place because

of serious charges of corruption. The question arises

whether for the misdeeds of some candidates, honest

and good candidates should also suffer on en masse

cancellation leading to termination of their services?

Should those honest candidates be compelled to suffer

without there being any fault on their part just because

the respondents find it difficult to segregate the cases of

tainted candidates from the other candidates? The task

may be difficult for the respondents, but in my

considered view, in the interest of all concerned and

particularly in the interest of honest candidates, the

State must undertake this task. The unscrupulous

candidates should not be allowed to damage the entire

system in such a manner where innocent people also

suffer great ignominy and stigma.

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 29 of 39

125.This Court had an occasion to examine a

similar controversy in the case of Onkar Lal Bajaj's case

(supra). In that case, there were serious allegations of

political patronage in allotment of retail outlets of

petroleum products, (LPG distributorships and SKO-

LDO dealerships). This Court laid down that how could

a large number of candidates against whom there was

not even insinuation be clubbed with handful of those

who were said to have been allotted

dealerships/distributorships on account of political

connection and patronage? This Court clearly stated

that the two were clearly unequals. Equal treatment to

unequals is nothing but inequality. This is the most

important principle which has been laid down in this

case by this Court. The Court further observed that to

put both the categories, tainted and the rest, on par is

wholly unjustified, arbitrary and unconstitutional, being

violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. In somewhat

similar circumstances, in this case, the Government,

instead of discharging its obligation, unjustly resorted to

the cancellation of all the allotments en masse by

treating unequals as equals without even prima facie

examining their cases. Those officers whose services

were affected because of en masse cancellation have

not been given an opportunity to represent before the

concerned authorities. In the case of Onkar Lal Bajaj

there were 413 cases and the task was indeed difficult

to segregate the cases of political connection and

patronage with other cases. But, even then, this Court

while, setting aside the order of the Government

cancelling the allotment, appointed a Committee of two

retired Judges, one of this Court and another from the

Delhi High Court, and they were requested to examine

all 413 cases and decide the matter after getting the

report from that Committee appointed by the Court.”

29)In view of the above, the issue of entire selection process

having been vitiated would have arisen only if the findings of the

Committee were that it was not possible to distinguish the cases

of tainted from the non-tainted ones and there was a possibility

that all of them would have got the benefit of wrong doings of Mr.

Sidhu and his accomplices. Fortunately for these appellants, it is

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 30 of 39

not so as they have been found innocent. The appellants get

ensconced, earning a safe place, once they are removed from the

category of nefarious persons. Though the tainted candidates

have rightly received their comeuppance, but the innocent persons

cannot be punished with them. Thus, it is difficult to accept the

fallibilistic conclusion of the High Court.

30)We have also gone through the reasons given by the High

Court in the impugned judgment, in support of the conclusion that

the entire process is to be treated as vitiated. We find that reasons

are the same which were placed earlier before the High Court by

the Government in Amarbir Singh's case (supra) and they were

very much before this Court as well when the judgment in

Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra) was rendered. Without

alluding to them in detail, we may say in nutshell that the reasons

given pertain to the conduct and role of Mr. Sidhu and his

accomplices who had taken money/bribes from some of the

candidates or had given undue favour to some other candidates

because of other influences. The material discussed is the

allegations in various FIRs and statements of Mr. Jagman Singh, a

confident and tout of Mr. Sidhu (who had become approver in the

criminal case), and others recorded under Section 161 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the cases in the criminal

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 31 of 39

trial. However, even after noticing these very reasons, this Court

had held that those who are innocent cannot be punished because

of the misdeeds of Mr. Sidhu in showing favour to other tainted

candidates.

31)There is yet another reason to hold that these persons who

have come up clean, meaning thereby, who have entered the

service by passing the examination on their own merits, should be

allowed to continue in the Government service. We have already

mentioned in the earlier part of the judgment, while discussing the

case of Inderpreet Singh Kahlon (supra), that the Court had

not approved the recommendation of the High Court, on the basis

of which the Government had acted, in respect of the judicial

officers whose services were also terminated. It is not necessary

to state in detail the reasons given by the Court while condemning

the action of terminating the services of the judicial officers, which

was taken in undue haste. The Court had also remarked that all

these judicial officers were subjected to viva voce/interview test as

well, which was conducted as per Rule 17(a)(iii) of the Punjab Civil

Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970, and no breach of

the aid Rule had been pointed out. The Committee which

interviewed these judicial officers included a Judge of the High

Court as well. The Court categorically observed that there may be

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 32 of 39

some cases where marks had been given for extraneous

considerations, but only because there was such a possibility, the

same by itself, without analysing more, may not be a ground for

arriving at a conclusion that the entire selection process was

vitiated. The direction was, accordingly, given to consider the

entire matter afresh.

32)After remand the Writ petitions of these judicial officers were

decided by the High Court in the case titled as Sirandip Singh

Panag v. State of Punjab, 2008 (4) RSJ 288. The High Court

had allowed those petitions. The said judgment of the High Court

was challenged before this Court in the matter of High Court of

Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh v. State of Punjab &

Ors., (2010) 11 SCC 684. This Court, by means of the aforesaid

judgment, upheld the decision of the High Court. The Court

specifically noted that after the directions in Inderpreet Singh

Kahlon (supra), a Committee of three Judges was constituted

which undertook this exercise and submitted its report. It was a

fractured report where two learned Judges of the Committee were

of the view that entire selection process was vitiated and one

Judge had appended his dissent thereto on the ground that only

those who were found to be tainted and were segregated by the

Committee should be dismissed from service and not the non-

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 33 of 39

tainted officers. No doubt, while upholding the directions of the

High Court, this Court made it clear that it was not to be construed

as giving seal of approval to the judgment of the High Court. At

the same time, the Court also stated, in so many words, that in

order to work out the equities and to do complete justice, that it

was proper to allow those judicial officers to continue in service

who were found to be untainted. It would be apposite to quote the

following portion of the said judgment in this behalf:

“26. It is not in dispute any more that the candidates

were given fresh opportunity to appear for selection for

the aforesaid post in the exams exclusively held for them

in the year 2004. Out of 57 such candidates, 20

candidates were reslected and they were given benefit

of original appointment. As many of these candidates

are the respondents and have worked as judicial officers

for some period and it has also not been proved or

established completely against them that they had

indulged in malpractice in examinations, we are of the

view that they should also be given reappointment and

posting orders to the existing vacancies in the State of

Punjab and if no vacancy exists, Mr. Sharan has

assured the court that the State will create

supernumerary posts for them but they would not be

entitled to get all the benefits as have been granted to

them vide the impugned judgment.

27. However, it should not be construed that our

judgment is giving seal of approval to the judgment of

the Full Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court

but with an intention to work out the equities and to do

complete justice between the parties and in view of the

earlier judgment of his Court in Kahlon case that tainted

candidates be separated from untainted, meaning

thereby that this Court did not accept the submission

that it was not practically possible to do so; and further

this Court had taken note of reselection held in 2004 in

para 92 of the judgment, but held that the effect thereof

would be subject to this case, this is the only via media,

through which the respondents could also be granted

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 34 of 39

relief as it could not be established that even otherwise,

they would have been declared as unsuccessful

candidates. Precisely, that is the reason we have

moulded the reliefs granted to the respondents by the

High Court as our order is not likely to affect seniority of

any of the judicial officers, who had already been

working prior to the respondents. We are conscious of

the fact that by this procedure, there is no likelihood of

any offshoots of the said order and hopefully the whole

controversy triggered in the year 1998, would stand

settled for all times to come.”

33)There is yet another crucial development which needs to be

mentioned here. In the first instance, it is the State which had

taken a decision to cancel the entire selection process. However,

after the remand order passed in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon’s

case (supra), in the exercise done by the Committee screening out

the tainted from non-tainted candidates, the State came forward

and showed its willingness to take back these candidates who

were non-tainted and were selected on the basis of their merit. A

specific affidavit to this effect was filed in the High Court. To the

same effect the affidavit has been filed before us also. We are of

the opinion that once those untainted officers, who were appointed

under the same environment, have been allowed to continue,

there is no reason to deprive this benefit of such recourse to the

PCS (Executive Branch) and Allied Services. We may note that

the High Court has recorded in the impugned judgment that 66%

cases were found to be of the persons given appointment who

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 35 of 39

were tainted, which influenced the entire selection process.

However, during the course of arguments, it was placed before us

that the aforesaid percentage is worked out by taking the cases of

direct recruits and nominated candidates together. If the figures

are separately taken, out of 93 direct recruits, 76 have joined and

only 10 are found to be tainted. In fact, the percentage of such

tainted candidates in nominated category was much higher, i.e.

80%. It was, thus, argued that the cases of direct recruits cannot

be taken along with those in nominated category, who influenced

the decision in their matter as well. This is also a supportive and

important fact which goes in favour of these appellants viz. the

non-tainted direct recruits.

34)The aforesaid discursive exercise prompt us to set aside the

judgment of the High Court in respect of these persons with the

direction that the appellants be allowed to join the duties forthwith.

It is, however, made clear that the intervening period during which

they remained out of service shall not count for seniority or any

other benefit. However, these persons shall be given the benefit

of service rendered by them earlier viz. from September 1999 till

May 22, 2002, when they actually worked, for the purpose of

seniority and future promotion, etc. These appeals are partly

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 36 of 39

allowed to the aforesaid extent.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

.............................................J.

(DR. B.S. CHAUHAN)

.............................................J.

(A.K. SIKRI)

NEW DELHI;

MAY 23, 2014.

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 37 of 39

ITEM NO.1F COURT NO.2 SECTION IVB

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5589-5605 of 2014

JOGINDER PAL & ORS. ETC. .....APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S)

W I T H

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5606-5608 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5609-5611 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5612 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5613 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5614-5621 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5622 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5623 OF 2014

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5624 OF 2014

Date: 23/05/2014 These Appeals were called on for Judgment

today.

For Appellant(s) Ms. Kavita Wadia, Adv.

Ms. Bina Madhavan, Adv.

For M/s. Lawyer's Knit & Co.

Mr. Shubhash Bhowmick, Adv.

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 38 of 39

Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv.

Mr. Rohit Kumar singh, Adv.

Ms. Shalu Sharma, Adv.

Mr. R.C. Kaushik, Adv.

For Respondent(s)Mr. Kuldip Singh, Adv.

Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Adv.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri pronounced the Judgment

of the Bench comprising Hon'ble Dr. Justice B.S. Chauhan and

His Lordship.

The appeals are partly allowed in terms of the

reportable Judgment. There shall, however, be no order as to

costs.

(Pardeep Kumar) (M.S. Negi)

AR-cum-PS Assistant Registrar

(reportable signed Judgment is placed on the file)

Civil Appeal Nos. 5589-5605/2014 & connected matters Page 39 of 39