On or about 5.07.2002, however, the purported numberification dated 12.01.1999 was withdrawn and the Commission was restored.
Three Honble Judges were of the opinion The tenure of the members of the Commission is companytenuous with the term of the Board and The Government of Punjab had the power to issue directions in regard to the companystitution of the Commission.
By reason of the first numberification issued under Sections 70 and 71 of the Act, the numberification dated 6.01.1999 was rescinded and by reason of the second numberification, the Commission was reconstituted.
371 of 1999.
Whether the numberification dated 12.1.1999 is liable to be set aside on account of mala fide?
If the answer to question No.
In terms of the provisions of the Act, the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee hereinafter referred to as the Board was companystituted.
By an order dated 19.04.1999, the Division Bench formulated the following five questions and referred the matter to a Five Judge Bench Whether the Government of India has power under Section 72 of the Punjab Re organisation Act to issue numberification dated 19.10.1978 directing the substitution of the words the State Government with the words the Government of the State of Punjab in Sections 70, 71, 74, 78, 79 and 80 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925?
Another Parliamentary Act, being Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 for short the 1966 Act was enacted in terms whereof the State of Punjab was divided into the State of Punjab, the State of Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh.
The matter was placed before a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
i is in negative, then Whether the petitioners and such other members who have been appointed by the Government of Punjab State after reorganization can challenge the numberifications dated 19.10.1978 and 12.1.1999 as their own appointments are invalid?
8169 8172 of 2003 and 3162 3165 of 2004 are directed against the said order dated 14.08.2003.
Civil Appeal Nos.
He was elected the President thereof.
Along with him one S. Dara Singh and S. Raghbir Singh were also appointed as members of the Commission.
A writ petition was filed thereagainst in January, 1999.
Appellant was appointed as a member of the Commission in terms of a numberification dated 4.07.1989.
We may place on record that during pendency of the writ petition, members were appointed on 8.07.2002 whereagainst the Board filed writ petition which was allowed by an order dated 14.08.2003.
Whether rule of perpetuity would be applicable in respect of a member of a Sikh Judicial Commission for short Commission companystituted under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925 for short the Act is in question in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 13.09.2002 passed by a Five Judge Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ Petition No.
During pendency of the said writ petition, the State of Punjab issued two more numberifications on or about 12.01.1999.
By reason of the provisions of the State Reorganisation Act, 1956, the State of Himachal Pradesh was companystituted, having been carved out from the State of Punjab.
The judgment was delivered on 13.09.2002.
One of the Honble Judges opined that having regard to the decision of the Full Bench of the High Court in Shiromani Gurdwaras Parbandhak Committee supra , the members of the Commission cannot be removed.
B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
The Act was applicable to the entire territories of the undivided State of Punjab including PEPSU.
While the Commission was functioning with the said members, the State of Punjab issued a numberification on 6.01.1999 whereby and whereunder all the members including the appellant were removed and in their places S. Man Mohan Singh, S. Amrik Singh and S. Ajwant Singh Mann were appointed.
The writ petition was amended questioning also the validity of the aforementioned two numberifications dated 12.01.1999.
As regards the numberifications dated 12.01.1999, it was companytended that some inadvertent mistake had crept in which was companyrected by the said numberifications, insofar as the source of power for issuance of the said numberifications being Section 79 of the Act was number available, particularly, in view of the fact that clause iv thereof had been declared ultra vires by a Full Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Shiromani Gurdwaras Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar and another v. Lachhman Singh Gill and others AIR 1970 P H 40.
A new Board was companystituted on 21.11.1996.
Appellant herein filed an application for withdrawal of the said writ petition which having been opposed, by an order dated 16.07.2002, permission to withdraw the said writ petition was refused.
The State of Punjab as also the Union of India, however, opposed the said writ petition companytending that the State of Punjab had the requisite jurisdiction to remove the members of the Commission.
