CWP-15195-1996 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Param Pal Sharda State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE 1. appointment Council, Patiala, essentially on two grounds 2. Municipal Council, Patiala, was dissolved CWP No. 7104 of 1995 1996 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Param Pal Sharda Versus Punjab and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE Mr. Vijay Pal, Advocate, and Mr. Akash Lather, Advocate. for the petitioner. Mr. Salil Sabhlok, Senior DAG, Punjab. Mr. Sanjeev Soni, Advocate, and Mr. Sarthak Soni, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Mr. Jatinder Nagpal, Advocate, for respondents No.4 to 6. **** SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE ( Oral ) This petition has been filed challenging the selection appointment of respondents No.5 and 6 to the post of Clerk Council, Patiala, for which an advertisement was issued some time in 1996, essentially on two grounds. The first ground in support of aforesaid challenge is that Municipal Council, Patiala, was dissolved in 1995, which order was assailed in CWP No. 7104 of 1995, wherein vide interim order dated 29.05.1995 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-15195-1996 Date of decision : 08.07.2025 …….Petitioner ...….Respondents SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE Salil Sabhlok, Senior DAG, Punjab. Mr. Sanjeev Soni, Advocate, and Jatinder Nagpal, Advocate, ( Oral ) This petition has been filed challenging the selection of respondents No.5 and 6 to the post of Clerk in Municipal for which an advertisement was issued some time in 1996, The first ground in support of aforesaid challenge is that in 1995, which order was assailed in interim order dated 29.05.1995 passed 1996 .2025 …….Petitioner ...….Respondents This petition has been filed challenging the selection and in Municipal for which an advertisement was issued some time in 1996, The first ground in support of aforesaid challenge is that in 1995, which order was assailed in passed NAROTAM DASS 2025.07.10 09:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-15195-1996 by a Division Bench of this Court restrained from taking policy decision of far 2.1 advertisement, conduction of selection and making of Clerk were Municipal Council, Patiala 2.2 who was one of the selected and appointed Clerk Niranjan Dass, President, Municipal Council, Patiala (respondent No.4 herein), being son of sister be a Member of Selection Sub Committee. 3. objecting to the petition, primarily on two grounds : (i) once having participated in the selection process, the petitioner cannot turn around and challenge the very selection process, in which he had voluntarily participated with open eyes; and (ii) respondent No.5 is not related at all to Shri Niranjan Dass, President, Municipal Council, Patiala. 4. written statement. 4.1 was related to respondent No.5 or respondent No.6. It is only the recommendation of Selection Sub Committee, which was placed before General House President, Municipal Council. Since the entire recommendation was 1996 a Division Bench of this Court, the from taking policy decision of far Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that issuance of isement, conduction of selection and making were major policy decisions, which could not have been taken by Municipal Council, Patiala, in the backdrop of aforesaid interim order. The second ground taken by who was one of the selected and appointed Clerk Niranjan Dass, President, Municipal Council, Patiala (respondent No.4 herein), being son of sister-in-law of Shri Niranjan Dass, who be a Member of Selection Sub Committee. Municipal Council, Patiala, has come out with a response objecting to the petition, primarily on two grounds : (i) once having participated in the selection process, the petitioner cannot turn around and allenge the very selection process, in which he had voluntarily participated with open eyes; and (ii) respondent No.5 is not related at all to Shri Niranjan Dass, President, Municipal Council, Patiala. I have perused the documents filed with the petiti written statement. It is found that none of the Members of Selection Sub Committee was related to respondent No.5 or respondent No.6. It is only the recommendation of Selection Sub Committee, which was placed before House of the Municipal Council, presided over by Shri Niranjan Dass, President, Municipal Council. Since the entire recommendation was -2- the Municipal Council, Patiala, from taking policy decision of far-reaching consequences. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that issuance of isement, conduction of selection and making of appointments to the post , which could not have been taken by , in the backdrop of aforesaid interim order. The second ground taken by petitioner is that respondent No.5, who was one of the selected and appointed Clerks, was closely related to Shri Niranjan Dass, President, Municipal Council, Patiala (respondent No.4 law of Shri Niranjan Dass, who was alleged to Municipal Council, Patiala, has come out with a response objecting to the petition, primarily on two grounds : (i) once having participated in the selection process, the petitioner cannot turn around and allenge the very selection process, in which he had voluntarily participated with open eyes; and (ii) respondent No.5 is not related at all to Shri Niranjan Dass, President, Municipal Council, Patiala. I have perused the documents filed with the petition as well as It is found that none of the Members of Selection Sub Committee was related to respondent No.5 or respondent No.6. It is only the recommendation of Selection Sub Committee, which was placed before , presided over by Shri Niranjan Dass, President, Municipal Council. Since the entire recommendation was accepted was Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that issuance of to the post , which could not have been taken by petitioner is that respondent No.5, , was closely related to Shri Niranjan Dass, President, Municipal Council, Patiala (respondent No.4 ed to Municipal Council, Patiala, has come out with a response objecting to the petition, primarily on two grounds : (i) once having participated in the selection process, the petitioner cannot turn around and allenge the very selection process, in which he had voluntarily participated with open eyes; and (ii) respondent No.5 is not related at all to Shri Niranjan on as well as It is found that none of the Members of Selection Sub Committee was related to respondent No.5 or respondent No.6. It is only the recommendation of Selection Sub Committee, which was placed before , presided over by Shri Niranjan Dass, accepted NAROTAM DASS 2025.07.10 09:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-15195-1996 by majority of the presided over by 4.2 malafide alleged against any Member of the Screening Committee or Selection Sub Committee, the petitioner is stopped from challenging the very selection process, in which he had voluntarily p 5. 6. July 08, 2025 narotam Whether speaking/reasoned Whether 1996 by majority of the General House, it does not matter if such House was presided over by relative of one of the candidates. More over, this Court also finds that in the absence of any malafide alleged against any Member of the Screening Committee or Selection Sub Committee, the petitioner is stopped from challenging the very selection process, in which he had voluntarily participated with open eyes. In view of above, no case for interference is made out. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. July 08, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -3- , it does not matter if such House was candidates. More over, this Court also finds that in the absence of any malafide alleged against any Member of the Screening Committee or Selection Sub Committee, the petitioner is stopped from challenging the very selection articipated with open eyes. In view of above, no case for interference is made out. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. ( SHEEL NAGU ) CHIEF JUSTICE Yes/No Yes/No , it does not matter if such House was More over, this Court also finds that in the absence of any malafide alleged against any Member of the Screening Committee or Selection Sub Committee, the petitioner is stopped from challenging the very selection NAROTAM DASS 2025.07.10 09:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment