Respondent 5 Hans Raj Khanna was enrolled as a Pleader of the Lahore High Court on July 17, 1934, and then enrolled as an Advocate of the said Court on December 20, 1940.
Respondent 6 P. R. Sawhney was called to the Bar on November 17, 1930, and was enrolled as an Advocate of the Lahore High Court on March 10, 1931.
He was enrolled as an Advocate of the Lahore High Court on May 15, 1933, and practised as such in that Court.
On May 6, 1949, he got his licence to practise as an Advocate suspended.
Respondent 2 Shamshere Bahadur, J. was called to the Bar in England on January 26, 1933, by the Middle Temple.
M. Sikri, Advocate General.for the Punjab, N. S. Bindra, L. Arora and D. Gupta for the respondent No.
He started his practice as a lawyer at Amritsar and he companytinued his practice there till his appointment as District and Sessions Judge.
S. B. Chari, M. S. K. Sastri and K. L. Mehta, for the appellant.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment dated September 21, 1959, of the Punjab High Court, Chandigarh, in Civil Writ No.
After partition he shifted to Delhi and worked for sometime as Legal Adviser to the Custodian, Evacuee Property, Delhi.
December 5.
Gurbachan Singh.
N. Sanyal, Additional Solicitor General of India, and D. Gupta, for the Intervener, Union of India .
On February 9, 1949, he was enrolled as an Advocate of the Federal Court of India.
K. Nambiyar, M. S. K. Sastri and K. L. Mehta, for the Interveners Om Dutt Sharma and B. D. Pathak .
In other words, they were practising as Advocates at the time they were so appointed.
Then he functioned as Legal Remembrancer of the State Government from December 1953 to May 1959, when, he was appointed as an Additional Judge of the Punjab High Court.
Then lie practised for sometime at Delhi he then accepted service under the Ministry of Rehabilitation as an Officer on Special Duty and Administrator, Rajpura Township.
He worked as an Additional District and Sessions Judge, s Ferozepore, from July 2, 1947 , to February 22, 1948.
Respondent 4 Gurdev Singh, J. was enrolled as a Pleader of the Lahore High Court on October 25, 1934, and then as an Advocate of the said Court on December 20, 1938.
These respondents have filed separate affidavits in reply, and some of them have been separately represented and heard.
On and after August 15, 1947, he practised as an Advocate of the East Punjab High Court till he was appointed as District and Sessions Judge on March 20,1950.
Tirth Singh Munjral and R. H. Dhebar, for respondents Nos.
His name was borne on the Roll of Advocates prepared by the East Punjab High Court when he was appointed as District and Sessions Judge on February1, 1952.
They filed three revision petitions in respect of the orders passed, which are pending in the High Court.
V. Viswanatha Sastri, R. Ganapathy Iyer and D. Gupta, for respondents Nos.
An application for a certificate of fitness having failed in the High Court, the appellant asked for and obtained special leave from this Court.
4 and 6.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.
Civil Appeal No.
233 of the Constitution at the time when they were so appointed by the State Government, number respondent 1 before us, and, therefore, their appointment as such was companystitutionally invalid and the appellant claimed by way of his main relief that a writ in the nature of a writ of quo warranto should issue ousting them from their office and restraining them from exercising the powers, duties and functions of the posts they are holding and from claiming any rights, privileges or emoluments attached to their office.
Two of them, Harbans Singh and P. R. Sawhney, did number have their names factually on the Roll when they were appointed as District Judges.
Shorn of details which are number material, the case of the appellant was and is that the aforesaid five persons, number respondents 2 to 6 before us, were number qualified to be appointed as District Judges under Art.
Certain other subsidiary or ancillary reliefs were, also claimed details whereof need number number be stated, We have stated that the petition was summarily dismissed by the High Court.
On April 18, 1950, he was appointed as District and Sessions Judge and on August 11, 1958, he was appointed as an Additional Judge of the Punjab High Court.
The other persons B. D. Pathak and Om Dutt Sharma had also filed a writ petition in the Punjab High Court challenging the legality of the appointment of P. R. Sawhney who, it appears, had acquitted certain persons in three criminal appeals decided by him on January 22, 1959, as Additional District and Sessions Judge, Delhi, from the decision of a magistrate of Delhi in a case in which B. D. Pathak and Om Dutt Sharma said that they had been assaulted by the persons accused in the case.
2, 3 and 5.
226 of the Constitution for certain relief, in respect of five persons, two of whom are number working as Additional Judges of the Punjab High Court, the third as Officiating Judge of the same Court, the fourth as District and Sessions Judge, Delhi, and the fifth as Registrar, Punjab High Court, Chandigarh.
The Union of India was originally a party respondent to the petition inasmuch as the appellant had initially impugned the appointment of two of the respondents as High Court Judges this relief was, however, given up during the pendency of the special leave petition and on an application made by the appellant, the name of the Union of India was struck off by an order dated March 18, 1960, leaving the matter in dispute limited to the question of the validity of the initial appointment of respondents 2 to 6 as District Judges only.
On March 30, 1949, he became the chairman, Jullundur Improvement Trust.
Later, the Union of India made an application to intervene in the appeal and in view of the circumstance that a question of the interpretation of Art.
The Advocate General of Punjab has appeared and companytested the appeal on behalf of respondent 1.
Respondent 3 Harbans Singh, J. was also called to the Bar and then enrolled as an Advocate of the Lahore High Court on March 5, 1937.
438 of 1960.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by S. leave K. DAS, J. This is an appeal by special from an order of the High Court of Punjab dated September 21, 1959, by which it summarily dismissed petition made by the present appellant under Art.
It would thus appear that of the five respondents mentioned above, three, namely, Shamshere Bahadur, Gurudev Singh and Hans Raj Khanna had their names on the Roll of Advocates of the Punjab High Court before they were appointed as District Judges.
On behalf of the respondents who are numberlonger working as District Judges a preliminary objection has been taken to the maintainability of the appeal.
1050 of 1959.
The appeal has been companytested by the State of Punjab, respondent 1, and the other respondents of whom Shamsher Bahadur, Harbans Singh and Gurdev Singh are Justices of the Punjab High Court, Hans Raj Khanna is District and Sessions Judge, Delhi, and P. R. Sawhney is Registrar of the High Court.
On March 15, 1948, he worked as Deputy Custodian, Evacuee Property, till April 17, 1950.
He then returned to practice at Simla for a short while.
It would facilitate appreciation of the points in companytroversy if we state first, in broad outline, the circumstances in which respondents 2 to 6 were appointed as District Judges.
In view of these circumstances they have also been allowed to intervene in the present appeal in so far as it relates to the appointment of P. R. Sawhney, and we have heard learned Counsel on their behalf.
on August 19, 1960.
He was enrolled as an Advocate of the Federal Court of India on May 29, 1948, and was companytinuously in practice till he was appointed as District and Sessions Judge on February 2.
On April 6, 1957, he was appointed as District and Sessions Judge.
On July 11, 1960, he was appointed to officiate as a Judge of the Punjab High Court.
