STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. SODHA SULCHDEV SINGH
LAWS(SC)-1960-11-35
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on November 15,1960

STATE OF PUNJAB,STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Appellant
VERSUS
SODHA SULCHDEV SINGH Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

W.S.IRWIN V. D.J.REID [ ]
KALIAPPA UDAYAN V. EMPEROR [ ]
I.M.LALL V. SECY. OF STATE [ ]
TILKA VS. STATE [ ]



Cited Judgements :-

MAGUNI DEI VS. GOURANGA SAHU [LAWS(ORI)-1978-2-9] [REFERRED TO]
N.K. PANDA VS. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ORS. [LAWS(ORI)-1976-12-15] [REFERRED TO]
RAMRAO VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1986-12-3] [REFERRED TO]
JOTI PRASAD SHARMA VS. ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE DEHRADUN [LAWS(ALL)-1965-10-4] [REFERRED TO]
GOODWILL INDIA LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-1974-4-23] [CITED]
UTTAM CON INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2019-12-39] [REFERRED TO]
P. SHYAMSUNDER SINGH VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(MANIP)-2021-1-4] [REFERRED TO]
RAMDAS S/O. MAROTRAO KATHLE VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2016-10-36] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. PARKASH LAL [LAWS(P&H)-1976-10-44] [REFERRED TO]
THE STATE VS. HARI RAM [LAWS(P&H)-1968-8-30] [REFERRED TO]
M C SHANMUKHAN VS. VACHALI JAYALAKSHMI [LAWS(KER)-1986-10-38] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI TRIDIB SHARMA VS. THE STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-1985-5-11] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. B.R. BAJAJ, SPECIAL SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH [LAWS(P&H)-1989-1-59] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. MADAN LAL GUPTA [LAWS(P&H)-1990-7-10] [REFERRED TO]
MANMOHAN SINGH WALIA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2013-12-151] [REFERRED TO]
BILLAL MIAH VS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR [LAWS(TRIP)-2019-1-1] [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, BARWALA, DISTRICT HISAR, HARYANA VS. JAI NARAYAN AND COMPANY [LAWS(SC)-2022-3-86] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. INDRADEO KUMAR [LAWS(PAT)-1962-9-2] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. V D KUMAR [LAWS(PAT)-1974-4-12] [REFERRED TO.]
SHANTI SPORTS CLUB VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2009-8-46] [REFERRED TO]
VED PRAKASH GUPTA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2020-11-19] [REFERRED TO]
SHARAD MANILAL GOSALIA VS. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER GOVERNMENT OF GOA [LAWS(BOM)-1991-1-36] [REFERRED TO]
ORIENT PAPER MILLS VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-1978-9-2] [REFERRED TO]
M K MATHULLA VS. N N WANCHOO [LAWS(DLH)-1970-1-12] [REFERRED TO]
DEVSHREE BANDHE, W/O DINESH KUMAR BANDHE VS. CHHATTISGARH STATE POWER HOLDING COMPANY LIMITED [LAWS(CHH)-2017-2-35] [REFERRED TO]
R DE SEQUAIRA VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-1973-12-4] [REFERRED TO]
P S PANDURANGA RAO VS. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(KAR)-1999-3-75] [REFERRED]
SUJIT KANTHA NEOGI AND ANR. VS. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-1969-8-7] [REFERRED TO]
S PARTAP SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(SC)-1963-9-13] [REFERRED]
KUNJANNAM VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-1964-2-20] [RELIED ON]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. SALIL SABHLOK [LAWS(SC)-2013-2-60] [REFERRED TO]
RESERVE BANK OF INDIA VS. SUDERSHAN KUMAR KHANNA [LAWS(DLH)-1969-1-22] [REFERRED]
LARSEN AND TOUBRO LIMITED VS. PRIME DISPLAYS PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(BOM)-2002-3-15] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. SUDHIR KUMAR ROY [LAWS(ORI)-1962-12-3] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. K.C. BANGAR [LAWS(P&H)-2008-4-27] [REFERRED TO]
GOPALAN NAIR VS. BHASKARAN [LAWS(KER)-2001-11-70] [REFERRED TO]
AMAR CHAND VS. SUKH RAM [LAWS(HPH)-1973-5-12] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. INDIA ELECTRIC CORPORATION [LAWS(BOM)-1977-12-25] [REFERRED TO]
M M DINESH VS. UNION TERRITORY OF PONDICHERRY [LAWS(MAD)-2006-2-28] [REFERRED TO]
MUTHU N VS. EXCUTIVE DIRECTOR BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD [LAWS(MAD)-2000-3-18] [REFERRED TO]
J P BANSAL VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(SC)-2003-3-15] [REFERRED]
M.D. OVERSEAS LTD. VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(ALL)-2013-12-183] [REFERRED TO]
GAJENDRA SINGH VS. NAGARPALIKA NIGAM GWALIOR [LAWS(MPH)-1994-7-2] [REFERRED TO]
CSEPDI - TRISHE CONSORTIUM VS. TAMILNADU GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION CORPORATION LIMITED (TANGEDCO) AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2015-9-91] [REFERRED TO]
SRI H Y NARASIMHA PRASAD S/O LATE H R Y MURTHY VS. GENERAL MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK [LAWS(KAR)-2015-10-5] [REFERRED TO]
N.JOTHI VS. SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME [LAWS(MAD)-2012-10-1] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. M L V CHANDRASHEKHARAMURTHY [LAWS(KAR)-1983-10-12] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. KAILASHWATI [LAWS(RAJ)-1979-1-36] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. RAJ KUMAR GUJRAL [LAWS(P&H)-1966-8-10] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. SURJIT SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-1974-5-10] [REFERRED TO]
BACHHITTAR SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(SC)-1962-3-27] [RELIED ON]
UNION OF INDIA VS. H S PARASHAR [LAWS(DLH)-1977-12-6] [REFERRED TO]
N S MAINI VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-1970-3-28] [REFERRED]
S K BHATTACHARYA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-1979-11-36] [REFERRED]
K. M. SALIM VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2020-3-626] [REFERRED TO]
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA VS. B.B. SINGLA [LAWS(P&H)-2008-7-76] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION [LAWS(DLH)-2012-7-159] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD ILYAS ALVI VS. STATE OF MAHARASTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1964-8-4] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. JAGANNATH JENA [LAWS(ORI)-1973-4-38] [REFERRED TO]
KANAKA RAJ MEHTA VS. K V SHIVAKUMAR [LAWS(KAR)-1989-12-21] [REFERRED TO]
ESTATE OFFICER VS. CHARANJIT KAUR [LAWS(SC)-2021-9-20] [REFERRED TO]
S P GUPTA V M TARKUNDE J L KALRA IQBAL M CHAGLA MISS LILY THOMAS A RAJAPPA UNION OF INDIA D N PANDEY R PRASAD SINHA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-1981-12-23] [OVERRULED]
UNION OF INDIA VS. INDRA DEO KUMAR [LAWS(SC)-1964-1-5] [REFERRED]
SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER MIRZAPUR VS. RAJA SRINIVASA PRASAD SINGH [LAWS(SC)-1965-12-12] [REFERRED]
SHREE SWAMI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1994-6-7] [REFERRED TO]
JETHANAND VS. STATS OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1972-4-18] [REFERRED TO]
SIDDHARTHA BARUAH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2004-8-35] [REFERRED TO]
R RAMASRINIVASAN VS. P SHANMUGHAM [LAWS(MAD)-1968-10-18] [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE OFFICER VS. COMMISSION OF INQUIRY MARAD INCIDENTS [LAWS(KER)-2005-3-12] [REFERRED TO]
UNIK TRADERS VS. ADDL DIRECTOR GENERAL, DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE [LAWS(MAD)-2019-7-47] [REFERRED TO]
NOKIA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VS. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANOTHER [LAWS(DLH)-2018-3-145] [REFERRED TO]
DEBESH CHANDRA DAS VS. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) [LAWS(CAL)-1967-5-33] [REFERRED TO]
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION U.P. VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-222] [REFERRED TO]
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION U.P. VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-222] [REFERRED TO]
LAKSHMI INSURANCE CO LTD VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NEW DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-1967-10-18] [REFERRED TO]
HIRA SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-1969-9-13] [REFERRED 9.]
KHAIRATI LAL VS. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(DLH)-1974-3-27] [REFERRED TO]
K N GUPTA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(RAJ)-1969-5-6] [REFERRED TO]
JAGGANNATH DWARKANATH RAJE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1971-11-11] [REFERRED TO]
D S RAME VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1971-12-1] [REFERRED TO]
HASMUKH BALUBHAI SHAH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1984-6-16] [REFERRED TO]
DEBASIS PAL CHOUDHURI VS. ALLAHABAD BANK [LAWS(CAL)-1990-6-1] [REFERRED TO]
K. VENGOPALAN VS. THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. COMMERCIAL TAXES AND RELIGIOUS ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, MADRAS [LAWS(MAD)-1978-3-71] [REFERRED TO]
LUNKHEL KHAIJAMANG HAOKIP VS. STATE OF MANIPUR AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-2005-7-22] [REFERRED TO]
STADMED PRIVATE LIMITED VS. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY APPELLATE BOARD [LAWS(CAL)-2012-6-4] [REFERRED TO]
NAROTTAMDAS L SHAH VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-1970-11-19] [REFERRED]
PRAKASH CHAND PRADHAN SON OF LATE MANIK CHAND PRADHAN VS. UNION FO INDIA [LAWS(SIK)-2017-7-7] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. A LAKSHMIKUTTY [LAWS(SC)-1986-11-60] [RELIED ON]
SAJITHA G VS. SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS NEW DELHI [LAWS(MAD)-1993-12-9] [RELIED ON]
MUHAMMED YUSUFF VS. STATE OF MADRAS AND OTHERS [LAWS(MAD)-1971-2-63] [REFERRED]
LAKSHMI KANT MISHRA AND ANOTHER VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-1986-7-25] [REFERRED TO]
PIMPRI CHINCHWAD NEW TOWNSHIP DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. VISHNUDEV COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY & ORS [LAWS(SC)-2018-8-5] [REFERRED TO]
REHAN AHMED LASKAR VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2005-2-13] [REFERRED TO]
MAHADEO VS. SOVAN DEVI [LAWS(SC)-2022-8-109] [REFERRED TO]
F A CORPN LTD VS. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF ORISSA LTD [LAWS(ORI)-1986-2-23] [REFERRED TO]
P S PANDURANGA RAO VS. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(KAR)-1999-4-37] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. R S VENKATARAMAN [LAWS(MAD)-2010-11-54] [REFERRED TO]
H L RODHEY VS. DELHI ADMINISTRATION [LAWS(DLH)-1968-8-4] [REFERRED TO]
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. THE AYACUTDARS OF VENKATRAYUDU TANK [LAWS(APH)-1963-10-23] [REFERRED TO]
SWADESHI COTTON MILLS LTD VS. SWADESHI POLYTEX [LAWS(ALL)-1980-9-22] [REFERRED TO]
RAHMAT ULLAH VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-1968-1-5] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD HUSSAIN VS. SECRETARY GOVT OF MAHARASHTRA HOME DEPARTMENT MANTRALAYA BOMBAY AND [LAWS(BOM)-1982-2-66] [REFERRED TO]
R K SHARMA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-1990-4-18] [REFERRED TO]
PEOPLES UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES ALLAHABAD VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-2000-1-1] [REFERRED TO]
S Sharravvanan VS. State of Tamil Nadu [LAWS(MAD)-2003-10-34] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. OM PARKASH GUPTA [LAWS(P&H)-1967-4-26] [REFERRED]
AFNAR CHAND BUTAIL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-1964-3-15] [REVERSED]
KUNJANAM ANTONY C KALLIATH VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-1962-12-31] [REFERRED TO]
KOTAH MATCH FACTORY KOTAH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1969-2-16] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH BHATIA VS. G PARIMALA [LAWS(APH)-2005-11-13] [REFERRED TO]
REGISTRAR GENERAL VS. A.KANAGARAJ [LAWS(MAD)-2013-6-46] [REFERRED TO]
BISHNU CHARAN MOHANTY VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-1973-2-8] [REFERRED TO]
J D METHA VS. P H NANAVATI [LAWS(BOM)-1983-3-23] [REFERRED TO]
SHIPRA CHOWDHURY VS. SUMANTRA CHOWDHURY [LAWS(CAL)-1992-9-1] [REFERRED TO]
SECURITIES EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA VS. FRANKLIN TEMPLETON TRUSTEES SERVICES PVT. LTD. [LAWS(KAR)-2020-10-87] [REFERRED TO]
MEDHI ALI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KAR)-1971-12-6] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF A P VS. G RAMESH [LAWS(APH)-2006-9-79] [REFERRED TO]
SOWDAMBIGAI MOTOR SERVICE VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU, SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT AND ORS [LAWS(MAD)-1979-7-67] [REFERRED]
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT. HEALTH AND MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION VS. R. VARDHARAJAN [LAWS(KAR)-1978-4-49] [REFERRED TO]
SARSWATI DEVI VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2019-4-182] [REFERRED TO]
R. LAKSHMAIAH AND ORS. VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. [LAWS(KAR)-2015-10-186] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH GUPTA AND OTHERS VS. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, RAIPUR, CHHATTISGARH AND ANOTHER [LAWS(CHH)-2017-10-64] [REFERRED TO]
B.S. SINDHU VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(HPH)-1971-8-7] [REFERRED TO]
RATTAN CHAND VS. SWARAN SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-1999-8-106] [REFERRED]
KULAMANI BISWAL VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR [LAWS(DLH)-2018-10-433] [REFERRED TO]
D L F HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION PVT LTD VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-1962-12-45] [REFERRED]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. RAJ NARAIN [LAWS(SC)-1975-1-18] [RELIED ON]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. RAJ NARAIN [LAWS(SC)-1975-1-18] [REFERRED TO]
BIGDOT ADVERTISING AND COMMUNICATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2002-12-77] [REFERRED TO]
RUPENDRA KASHYAP VS. JIWAN PUBLISHING HOUSE [LAWS(DLH)-1996-7-121] [REFERRED]
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. BADAPU APPANNA [LAWS(APH)-1961-11-18] [REFERRED TO]
RAMBHOTLA RAMANNA VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-1969-11-15] [REFERRED TO]
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. HEH THE NIZAM VIII OF HYDERABAD [LAWS(APH)-1992-9-43] [REFERRED TO]
RAJA SRINIWAS PRASAD SINGH VS. S [LAWS(ALL)-1961-11-2] [REFERRED TO]
RAJ NARAIN VS. INDIRA NEHRU GANDHI [LAWS(ALL)-1974-3-6] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. TULSIRAM AGARWALLA [LAWS(CAL)-1980-7-34] [REFERRED TO]
LAKSHMANDAS CHAGANLAL BHATIA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-1966-4-5] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. BIHAR STATE PUBLIC SERVICE [LAWS(PAT)-1969-2-15] [REFERRED TO]
N P MATHUR VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-1971-6-1] [REFERRED TO]
SUDHINDRA CHANDRA MALIK VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-1982-3-1] [REFERRED TO]
DURGA PRASAD VS. PARVEEN [LAWS(MPH)-1975-2-13] [REFERRED TO]
OM KUMAR JAIDKA VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2010-10-157] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. T P NANDAKUMAR [LAWS(KER)-2005-9-19] [REFERRED TO]
PEOPLES UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES ALLHABAD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2000-12-5] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA MURARI PANDEY VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-1996-3-96] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION & P.D. KHANDELWAL [LAWS(DLH)-2009-11-228] [REFERRED TO]
THE STATE OF PUNJAB VS. SHRI KHEMI RAM [LAWS(P&H)-1963-5-47] [REFERRED TO]
BHANU PARKASH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-1968-9-52] [REFERRED]
UNION OF INDIA VS. S P SINGH [LAWS(SC)-2008-5-181] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL VS. SUNIL KUMAR VAISH [LAWS(SC)-2011-8-88] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This appeal raises for our decision a question of law of general importance under Secs. 123 and 162 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, (hereafter called the Act. ) Originally the same point had been raised in another civil appeal before this Court, Civil Appeal No. 241 of 1955. The said appeal was the result of a dispute between Dowager Lady Dinbai Dinshaw Petit on the one hand and the Union of India and the State of Bombay on the other. Having regard to the importance of the point raised by the said appeal a Division Bench of this Court before whom it first came for hearing directed that it should be placed for disposal before a Constitution Bench, and accordingly it was placed before us. The appellant and the respondent in the present appeal then applied for permission to intervene because the same point arose for decision in this appeal as well; that is how this appeal was also placed before us to be heard after the Bombay appeal. After the Bombay appeal was heard for some days parties to the said appeal amicably settled their dispute and a decree by consent was passed. In the result the point of general importance raised by the said appeal fell to be considered in the present appeal; and so the appellant and the respondent in the said appeal asked for permission to intervene in the present appeal, and we directed that the arguments urged by Mr. Viswanatha Sastri and Mr. Seervai, for the appellant and the State of Bombay respectively, should be treated as arguments urged by interveners in the present appeal. Mr. Bindra, who appears for the appellant State of Punjab in the present appeal, and Mr. Gopal Singh who represents the respondent Sodhi Sukhdev Singh, have substantially adopted the arguments urged by Mr. Seervai and Mr. Sastri respectively and have also addressed us on the special facts in their appeal; that is how the point of law in regard to the scope and effect of Secs. 123 and 162 of the Act has to be decided in the present appeal.
(2.)This appeal has been brought to this Court by special leave granted by this Court, and it arises from a suit filed by the respondent against the appellant on 5/05/1958. It appears that the respondent was a District and Sessions Judge in the erstwhile State of Pepsu. He was removed from service on 7/04/1953, by an order passed by the President of India who was then in charge of the administration of the said State. The respondent then made a representation on 18/05/1955. This representation was considered by the Council of Ministers of the said State on 28/09/1955, because in the meantime the President's rule had come to an end and the administration of Pepsu was entrusted to the Council of Ministers. The Council expressed its views in the form of a Resolution on the representation of the respondent; but before taking any action it invited the advice of the Public Service Commission. On receiving the said advice the Council again considered the said representation on 8/03/1956, and views on the merits of the representation were expressed by the Members of the Council. These were recorded in minutes of the proceedings. Finally, on 11/08/1956, the representation was considered over again by the Council, and it reached a final conclusion in respect of it. In accordance with the said conclusion an order was passed which was communicated to the respondent. The order read thus: "reference his representation dated the 18/05/1955, against the order of his removal from service; the State Government have ordered that he may be re-employed on some suitable post".
(3.)After this order was communicated to him the respondent filed the present suit against the appellant and claimed a declaration, inter alia, that his removal from service on 7/04/1953, was illegal, void and inoperative and prayed for the recovery of Rs. 62,700-6-0 as arrears of his salary. The appellant disputed the respondent's claim on several grounds. Issues were accordingly framed by the trial judge on 27/01/1959. Meanwhile the respondent had filed an application under O. 14, R. 4 as well as O. 11, R. 14 of the Civil Procedure Code for the production of documents mentioned in the list annexed to the application. The trial court issued notice against the appellant for the production of the said documents. In reply to the notice Mr. E. N. Mangat Rai, Chief Secretary of the appellant, made an affidavit claiming privilege under Sec. 123 of the Act in respect of certain documents whose production had been ordered, and gave reasons in support of the claim. On the same day Mr. Mangat Rai made another affidavit in which he gave reasons for claiming similar privilege in respect of certain other documents. The statements made in these affidavits were challenged by the respondent who submitted a counter affidavit. After the affidavits had thus been filed by the parties the trial court heard their arguments on the question of privilege, and on 27/08/1959, it upheld the claim of privilege made by the appellant for the production of some documents, and accepted the reasons given by Mr. Mangat Rai in support of the said claim of privilege.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.