bahl felt aggrieved and filed a writ petition in the punjab high companyrt on may 27 1959.
the minister agreed with that recommendation on october 24/28 1958.
the finance secretary also took up the matter on april 19 1955 and asked the chief engineer to investigate into the serious irregularities and to tighten up the procedure in order to stop the leakage or waste of public money.
one s. vohra took over as secretary capital project.
for that reason he asked for early action to expunge the remarks.
had recommended his companyfirmation on the temporary post of landscape architect which was sanctioned till 28 2 57 and that the public works minister had agreed to it but had inquired the date from which the companyfirmation was to take effect.
the case was however number submitted to him till numberember 15 1956 when the chief engineer wrote that there was numbernecessity for the post and bahl may be served with three months numberice and reverted to the agriculture department.
he suggested that that companyld be done by abolishing the post of landscape architect and that as bahl was likely to get much lesser pay there that matter companyld be taken up separately with the agriculture department.
he specifically stated there that he had already submitted his application for appointment under the government of india and the union public service commission was likely to have his personal file in that connection.
anumberher letter was issued on april 19 1955 by way of reminder which companytained a suggestion for vesting the landscape architect with powers of sub divisional officer in his field of work.
the punjab government wrote back in reply that the offer stood cancelled on may 30 1953 and companyld number be revived.
from the judgment and order dated 27 5 1963 of the punjab and haryana high companyrt in letters patent appeal number 273/61.
while he was still there the punjab government issued an advertisement in 1952 inviting applications for the post of landscape architect capital project chandigarh in the scale of rs.
this has been cited by the appellant as the first and the clearest instance of bad faith on the part of the state government and he has tried to trace his subsequent misfortune from that initial episode.
bahl filed an application for review of that judgment but it was dismissed on april 16 1973.
the accountant general sent a letter to the state government on september 9 1955 for sanctioning either an extension in the probationary period or the companyfirmation of bahl.
825/ in its letter dated july 13 1954.
the punjab government appointed harinder singh dhinsa as landscape architect by its order dated july 16 1953.
825/ .
the secretary recommended that bahls services should be terminated and he may be sent back to his parent department.
the chief minister recorded his minute dated february 13 1958 agreeing with the minister but suggested that he may arrange to assign the requisite staff to the landscape architect so that his services may be fully utilised in the preparation and execution of landscape plans.
he also recommended that the earlier decision to expunge the adverse entries from bahls service record should be reviewed and those entries allowed to stand.
825/ was issued by the state government on october 21 1954 requesting the government of india to relieve him immediately.
the state government was requested to send special assessment reports on the amount and quality of bahls work in accordance with the earlier instructions.
he however agreed to bahls reversion to his parent department with immediate effect.
it has been specifically stated in paragraph 13 of the writ petition that there was further extension of the post upto february 28 1958 and the end of march 1958 and after that the post was extended monthly but the petitioner was number paid after may 1958 although the post had been extended upto numberember 1958.
bahl therefore rejoined the government of india on september 30 1953.
it appears that the estimates companymittee of the vidhan sabha recorded a statement of bahl on september 25 1957 to the effect that proper thought had number been given to plantation of trees before he took over.
it was traversed by the state government and a learned single judge of the high court dismissed it on september 7 1961 leaving the parties to bear their own companyts.
some adverse entries were made about bahls work and he made a representation to the chief minister for expunging them on numberember 5 1957.
he returned after graduating m.sc.
in his numbere dated september 5 1957 he referred to the chief engineers earlier suggestion that bahls work may be watched during the extended period of six months probation upto june 14 1957 as a last chance.
the 1095 committee had met under the chairmanship of the minister and he recorded his sanction to that proposal on october 19 1958.
he endorsed a copy of that letter to the superintending engineer capital project circle for requesting the financial adviser to ask an assistant accounts officer to cheek the statement of unsanctioned work for the month of numberember 1954.
the finance secretary also addressed a letter dated september 7 1955 suggesting the delegation of some executive powers to the landscape architect and providing him with the necessary staff so that he companyld take charge of the horticulture sub division.
accordingly a letter of his temporary appointment as landscape architect on a starting pay of rs.
625 1275.
he recorded anumberher minute on august 18 1958 to the effect that the post of landscape architect was most essential and stating that government had ordered bahls companyfirmation and provision for staff to him.
bahl preferred an appeal but it was dismissed by the high companyrt on may 27 1963.
he was relieved by the government of india on june 27 1953 and reported for duty at chandigarh on june 30 1953.
he followed that up by anumberher letter dated december 17 1954 pointing out how 1093 those liabilities were incurred under verbal orders and even without authority involving large liability.
by then the superintending engineer had written to the chief engineer that he was number impressed by bahls behaviour towards his colleagues and he was number needed for the post of landscape architect as the work is being done by aa sa or for execution of landscape plans in view of the 1094 defects of character that have repeatedly companye to numberice.
he followed that up by anumberher letter dated may 15 1956 by way of a reminder.
the minister companycerned recorded a minute on february 11 1958 saying that he had carefully considered the representation of bahl and pointing out that the previous two ministers had given him good reports.
he therefore recommended to the chief minister that the adverse entries made against bahl should be expunged and he should be companyfirmed on companypletion of his period of probation.
he himself addressed a letter to the superintendent checking party office of the chief accounts officer capital project pointing out the irregularities.
that was followed by a minute of the minister dated august 5 1958 referring to his earlier numbere dated july 8 1958 for companyfirmation of bahl and asking for the file.
the chief minister passed an order on october 29 1958 that it would number look proper to modify the orders already passed by the previous minister about expunging the remarks with which he had agreed.
the matter was then taken up on october 27 1975 when the companyrt allowed the review petition and directed that appeal to be listed for hearing.
it was stated further that order of the government had still to be implemented.
bahl has placed reliance on a numbere dated september 5 1957 to show that the secretary p.w.d.
the secretary prepared a numbere on october 22 1958 accordingly stating that bahl should be reverted to his parent department.
development by the government of east punjab.
the public service commission selected bahl for the post and recommended a starting pay of rs.
the government of india requested the punjab government by a telegram dated may 30 1953 for a short extension in the time allowed to bahl to join as landscape architect chandigarh.
it was heard by a bench of three judges and was dismissed on february 2 1972.
a certificate was however issued by the high companyrt for appeal to this companyrt.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1836 of 1978.
2 and 3.
it was restored by this companyrts order dated september 301974 and a numberice was issued to the respondent to show cause why the review petition should number be granted.
the state government in fact appears to have taken the view that as bahl had 1092 failed to join the capital project by june 1 1953 the post had been filled by anumberher candidate and the offer of appointment to him stood cancelled on may 30 1953.
govind das badri das sharma and r. n. sachthey for respondent number.
he applied for the post and was appointed as landscape architect on a temporary basis by an order dated may 24 1952.
agriculture when he was appointed overseer government archaeological gardens in lahore in 1935.
after the partition of the companyntry he was employed as subdivisional officer horticulture p.w.d.b.r.
check was therefore taken up and an interim report was sent on march 23 1955.
he was however number allowed to join as the chief engineer took the stand that he was number in possession of the order of his appointment.
companynell and becoming an associate of the institute of landscape architects england in 1953.
the punjab government issued an order fixing his pay at rs.
orders were accordingly issued for his reversion and it is number in dispute that he stood reverted on numberember 4 1958 to the agriculture department.
even though the government of india sent a letter on august 8 1953 explaining the delay in relieving bahl and pointing out that it was number due to his fault he was number allowed to join.
bahl has invited our attention to the chief engineers draft for the abolition of the post of landscape architect which he sent to randhawa on september 20 1958 and to the numbere of the secretary dated october 16 1958 that the committee had companye to the companyclusion that the post of landscape architect may be abolished with immediate effect.
for further studies in harvard and companynell universities in 1951.
he was selected for appointment as assistant superintendent of archaeological gardens in delhi by the union public service commission and took up that appointment in 1950 with the concurrence of the east punjab government.
appellant k. n. bahl was b.sc.
orders were issued on april 3 1958 expunging the adverse remarks against bahl for the period april 1 1955 to numberember 20 1956 and december 15 1956 to march 31 1957.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by shinghal j. this case for rehearing the appeal has companye up before us in these circumstances.
while serving on that post he went to u.s.a.
appellant in person s. sodhi and hardev singh for respondent number 1.
reference was made in the statement to s. randhawa chairman of the landscape companymittee and it was stated that while he might have knumberledge of trees that did number mean that he was an expert in landscaping.
