ORDER 1. Leave granted. Even though these appeals have a long and chequered history but it is not necessary to go into greater details thereof as on account of earlier orders passed by either the Full Benches of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh or by this Court, several questions have already been answered. However, a thumbnail sketch of the facts of the case would still be necessary to be dealt with which we will advert to. 2. These appeals have been preferred by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana against the common Full Bench judgment and order dated 27-5-2008 passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh in several civil writ petitions preferred by the respondents herein. 3. The whole controversy had arisen on account of certain alleged irregularities having been committed by the then Chairman of the Punjab Public Service Commission (for short "the Commission") Shri Ravinder Pal Singh Siddhu, who had allegedly shown favours to many candidates who had appeared for Punjab Civil Services, Judicial Branch, by awarding more marks and then recommending for their appointments on extraneous considerations. 4. The Full Bench of the High Court passed the following directions: "The petitioners in respect of 1998, 1999 and 2000 batches are ordered to be reinstated and the appointment letters earlier issued by the a State Government to the petitioners, namely, Ms Parveen Bali, Ms Manisha Jain, S/Shri Avtar Singh Barda, Mahesh Kumar, Balwinder Kumar, Harprit Singh, Gurkirpal Singh Sekhon and Tarantaran Singh Bindra, except for Rajwinder Kaur Bhatti (since deceased), relating to 2001 batch are ordered to be restored and thereafter, the respondent High Court is directed to issue posting orders to all the petitioners pertaining to b 1998-2000 batches and also of the eight petitioners aforementioned in respect of 2001 batch, within a period of three months from today. However, it is directed that the petitioners relating to 1998-2000 batches shall not be entitled to salaries for the period they remained out of job until the date of their reinstatement, but the said period shall be counted as the period spent on duties for the purpose of determining qualifying c service for pension and other purposes, including grant of increments, etc. Non-performance of duties for the said period shall not be treated as a break in service." However certain other directions were also issued by the Full Bench but we are not concerned with that part of the direction as the same is not the subject-matter of challenge in these appeals before us. 5. Before the pronouncement of the impugned judgment in these appeals by the Full Bench, earlier the Full Bench had also considered similar issues in various writ petitions filed by the respondents which came to be disposed of by the Full Bench on 7-8-2003. Against this earlier Full Bench judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court passed on 7-7-2003, the unsuccessful petitioners filed a civil appeal. This civil appeal came to be disposed of by the two learned Judges of this Court in Inderpreet Singh Kahlon v. State of Punjab. 6. After giving its anxious consideration to the whole issue involved in the matter, two learned Judges of this Court were of the considered opinion that it was not permissible to terminate the services of all the officers, without attempting to segregate the tainted from the untainted officers. Thus, obviously to complete the said exercise, as opined by two learned Judges of this Court, the matter was remanded to the High Court to constitute two committees for the aforesaid purposes, one with regard to judicial officers and another with regard to executive officers. 7. The relevant paras of the judgment of Inderpreet Singh Kahlon are reproduced herein below: (SCC pp. 400-01, paras 93-95) "93. We must, however, express our satisfaction that no candidate for the year 2001 has been appointed. It is one thing to say that having regard to the nature of selection process, no person is appointed from the select list as no person has a right to be appointed only because his name appears in the select list, but, in our opinion, a different standard must be adopted for terminating the services of the officers who had completed about three years of service. Some of them, as noticed hereinbefore, passed departmental tests. Some have been given higher responsibilities. They had completed the period of probation and some were nearing the completion thereof. They presumably had been' working to the satisfaction of the authorities concerned. 94. Some of them, as noticed hereinbefore, passed departmental tests. Some have been given higher responsibilities. They had completed the period of probation and some were nearing the completion thereof. They presumably had been' working to the satisfaction of the authorities concerned. 94. The impugned judgment as also the orders of the State Government and the High Court are, thus, liable to be set aside and directions are issued. Although the impugned judgments cannot be sustained, we are of the opinion that the interest of justice would be sub served if the matters are remitted to the High Court for consideration of the matters afresh. However, with a view to segregate the tainted from the non-tainted, and that in the interest of justice the High Court should be requested to constitute two independent Scrutiny Committees-one relating to the executive officers and the other relating to the judicial officers. (emphasis supplied by us) 95. We would, furthermore, request the High Court to consider the desirability of delineating the area which would fall for consideration by such Committees within a time-frame. Copies of such reports of the Committees shall be supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioners and/or at least they should be given inspection thereof. The parties shall be given opportunity to inspect any document including the answer sheets, etc. if an application, in that behalf is filed. Such inspection shall, however, be permitted to be made only in the presence of an officer of the court. The appellants shall be given two weeks' time only for submitting their objections to such reports and their comments, if any, on any material whereupon the High Court places reliance from the date of supply of copies or inspection is given. Having regard to the fact that the appellants are out of job for a long time, we would request the High Court to consider the desirability disposing of the matter as expeditiously as possible and preferably within the period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Before parting with the case, however, we may observe that it is expected that the State having regard to the magnitude of the matter shall leave no stone unturned to bring the guilty to book. It is the duty of the State to unearth the scam and spare no officer howsoever high he may be. Before parting with the case, however, we may observe that it is expected that the State having regard to the magnitude of the matter shall leave no stone unturned to bring the guilty to book. It is the duty of the State to unearth the scam and spare no officer howsoever high he may be. We expect the, State to make a thorough investigation into the matter. These appeals are allowed to the aforementioned extent and with the directions and observations made hereinbefore." 8. However, we may clarify here that we are not concerned with the exercise required to be completed with regard to the selection and appointment of the officers of the executive branch. 9. In the light of the remand order passed by this Court, a Committee of three learned sitting Judges of the High Court was constituted to complete the exercise of finding out tainted judicial officers from those who could be termed as untainted. The then Chief Justice of the High Court also requested the Committee to report the scope of the enquiry. However, there was difference of opinion among the three learned Judges and the opinion was expressed into 2: 1. 10. Final conclusion of the majority report of the two learned Judges is reproduced herein below: "In view of the material produced before us during scrutiny, we are of the opinion that it is not possible to segregate tainted from the non-tainted. The entire process was illegal and actuated with fraud. It appears that the material, which has now been placed before us, was not available to Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court for scrutiny. Earlier two reports made by 4-5 Judges respectively of this Court, were discarded because those reports did not discuss the facts which we have referred to in our reports, in its earlier part. It is a case where everybody i.e. selected candidates, Shri Ravi Sidhu, some of his officers, his family members, examiners and friends were the beneficiaries. Some of the selected candidates are on interim bail. Even then, on the basis of the limited material, which has been placed before us, we can safely say that the entire process of selection was a nullity. It was virtually a fraud with the system. Some of the selected candidates are on interim bail. Even then, on the basis of the limited material, which has been placed before us, we can safely say that the entire process of selection was a nullity. It was virtually a fraud with the system. Three conduits of Shri Ravi Sidhu have given a vivid description of the manipulations, being done for selecting the candidates, in Executive/Judicial Departments of the State of Punjab. Shri Randhir Singh Dhira and Jagman Singh were closely associated with Shri Ravi Sidhu. It is not possible for us to discard their statements because most of the facts stated by them, after investigation, were found to be correct. Assertion of Shri Jagman Singh that the question papers were being shown to the intending candidates, examiners were giving excess marks at the asking of Shri Ravi Sidhu, are clearly established when we look into the contents of the Preliminary Scrutiny Report. Further assertion of the above said person and also of Prem Sagar that Shri Sidhu had accepted huge amounts, by way of gratifications, was proved to be correct, after recovery of vast amount and acquisition of immovable properties worth crores by Shri Ravi Sidhu and his family members. As has been noticed earlier, none of the family members of Shri Ravi Sidhu was an income tax assessee. It has not come on record from where they had purchased the properties. Two are residing in USA and there is nothing on record to show that any amount was transferred by them from USA to India to Shri Ravi Sidhu, to justify the acquisitions of immovable properties and other amount by them. In view of this, it can safely be said that the immovable properties and the amount possessed by the family members of Shri Ravi Sidhu, were actually extracted by them from the candidates to appoint them in service of the State. The Commission had turned into a one man institution and the entire process of selection was being manipulated by Shri Ravi Sidhu for his personal gains or to oblige some important personalities in the State. In view of the material supplied by the investigating agency to us, we arrive at only one conclusion, that the entire process of selection to the PCS (Judicial Branch) was nothing but fraud upon, the deserving candidates and the system. In view of the material supplied by the investigating agency to us, we arrive at only one conclusion, that the entire process of selection to the PCS (Judicial Branch) was nothing but fraud upon, the deserving candidates and the system. We recommend that the entire process of selection deserves to be set aside. Observation made above is subject to the decision which may be arrived at by this Court on the judicial side. 23-2-2007 Judge" 11. The conclusion dated 22-3-2007 arrived at by minority Single Judge is reproduced herein below: "1. No individual candidate can be considered to be tainted on the basis of the scrutiny of the answer scripts done by the Committee's examiners. 2. No candidate can be considered to be tainted on the basis of the police investigation as no candidate has been prosecuted by the Vigilance Department in respect of the case registered against them. 3. Candidates who can be termed tainted, on the basis of the statements of the approvers, are the eights candidates whose names appeared in the statements of Prem Sagar (PW 1) and Randhir Singh Gill @ Dhira (PW 2). These candidates are as under: 1. Maninder Singh (1999 batch) 2 Ram Saran (2001 batch) 3. Preet-winder Singh (2001 batch) 4. Mandeep Kaur (2001 batch) 5. Monika Sethi (2001 batch) 6. Navdeep Singh (2001 batch) 7. Rajinder Bansal (2001 batch) 8. Anil Jindal (2001 batch) sd/- 22-3-2007 Judge" 12. In the light of the majority view as expressed hereinabove, after remand of the case by this Court in Kahlon ease, the Full Court meeting of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana took a decision to terminate the services of all those officers who were selected in the batch of 1998-1999 and 2000. Accordingly, orders were issued in this regard by the Government terminating their services which came to be challenged by the respondents herein by filing writ petitions. 13. All the writ petitions were heard analogously by a Full Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. After considering the rival contentions as administered by the learned counsel appearing for the parties before the Full Bench, the Full Bench came to the conclusion that all the observations and findings given by the majority members in their report are based upon presumptions and suppositions. After considering the rival contentions as administered by the learned counsel appearing for the parties before the Full Bench, the Full Bench came to the conclusion that all the observations and findings given by the majority members in their report are based upon presumptions and suppositions. While relying on the statement of the alleged approver Jagman Singh, the majority of the members of the Committee have observed in their report that all the candidates were helped at three stages in the selection process. They have further elaborated the three stages as mentioned herein below: (a) Firstly, the question papers were made available to the candidates before actual date of examination; (b) Secondly, the examiners helped the candidates in evaluation by awarding them high marks; and (c) Thirdly, the candidates were awarded high marks in the interview by the Selection Committee. However, it has also recorded a finding that the Committee failed to bring any evidence on record that any of the innocent candidates was ever helped in any of the aforesaid ways meaning thereby that all the findings in the report are only on the basis of presumption. 14. The Full Bench was also of the view that even those candidates who were not given appointment were labeled as tainted on the ground that the evaluation of their answer book scripts was neither fair nor proper. In the considered opinion of the Full Bench, there was nothing on record before the two Hon'ble Members of the Committee having a majority opinion to label the respondents as tainted candidates. 15. It has also been held by the Full Bench that if the revaluation result is applied to all candidates, that is, selected as well as non-selected, even then, the already selected eight candidates belonging to general category of 1999 batch would still remain in the select list. In the absence of any proper material before the two Hon'ble Members of the Committee, their findings that selected candidates were helped in the written examination and then they were awarded predetermined marks by the examiner had no basis and foundation. 16. In the absence of any proper material before the two Hon'ble Members of the Committee, their findings that selected candidates were helped in the written examination and then they were awarded predetermined marks by the examiner had no basis and foundation. 16. Ultimately, it was found that there is no taint in the selection of the respondents pertaining to 1998-2000 batches and also others, namely, S/Shri Gurkirpal Singh, Tarantaran S. Bindra, Ms Parveen Bali, Ms Manisha Jain, Avtar Singh Barda, Mahesh Kumar, Balwinder Kumar, Harprit Singh and Rajwinder Kaur Bhatti (since deceased) belonging to 2001 batch against whom no case has been registered nor they have been named by any of the, approvers nor any evidence whatsoever had been brought on record by the Committee regarding any irregularities in their selection. 17. Ultimately, after detailed and elaborate discussions, some of the petitions filed by the respondents were allowed and the relevant directions with regard to the aforesaid appeals have been reproduced in the preceding para 4 above. 18. It is against this part of the order passed by the Full Bench, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana is before us in appeals challenging the same on a variety of grounds. 19. Shri Raju Ramachandran, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant High Court submitted that considering the farcical nature of the examination or flawed nature of exams, the report submitted by two learned Judges of the Committee ought to have been accepted more so, when it was for filling up the post of judicial officers of the State. It was also contended that sanctity of the selection process has to be above board, more so, when the officers/candidates ultimately appointed would be performing their duties in dispensation of justice. 20. In the light of the aforesaid two grounds, it was contended that the impugned judgment cannot be sustained in law and deserves to be quashed. 21. In reply to the same, Shri. Amarendera Sharan, learned counsel appearing for the State of Punjab submitted that admittedly, the State has not preferred any special leave petition against the impugned judgment and has accepted the same. 21. In reply to the same, Shri. Amarendera Sharan, learned counsel appearing for the State of Punjab submitted that admittedly, the State has not preferred any special leave petition against the impugned judgment and has accepted the same. It has absolutely no objection in giving appointment to those who have been cleared by the Full Bench of the High Court, much emphasis has also been laid before us on the opinion expressed on the issue by the then Advocate General of the State to contend that the Government was bound to abide by the valued opinion of the Advocate General. It was also contended by him that investigation as directed by the High Court has since been completed and charge-sheet has been filed against the eight accused for whom no appointment letters have been issued. 22. Dr. Rajeev Dhavan, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents, that is, the petitioners before the High Court, submitted that when it was not possible to segregate the tainted officers/candidates with those said to be untainted officers/candidates, then the respondents should not be made to suffer for any reason more so, when the officers selected in the year 1998 had already put in three years of service, officers/candidates selected in the year 1999 had put in about 2 years of service and officers/candidates selected in 2000 had put in about one year service and the officers/candidates of 2001 were already issued letters of appointment and only posting orders were to be issued. 23. It was also contended by Dr. Dhavan that during, the period these officers/candidates had performed their duties on different posts of judicial officers, no complaint whatsoever has been received and their performance has been excellent and some of them have also been recommended for promotion. 24. It was also submitted by Dr. Dhavan that these respondents would have had no grievance if the copies of all the candidates would have been re-evaluated rather than doing the same on random basis. Lastly, it Was contended by him that in any case and in any event, the respondents had bee declared selected even after performing all the exercises as was directed to be done by this Court in Kahlon case. Therefore, they should not be made to suffer any further and the order of the High Court cannot be faulted on any legal grounds. Therefore, they should not be made to suffer any further and the order of the High Court cannot be faulted on any legal grounds. In other words, he submitted, along with a battery of lawyers appearing for other private respondents, echoing in the same voice that the High Court was not justified in filing the appeal, more so, when the State itself did not prefer any appeal against the impugned order and had expressed its complete satisfaction over the same. 25. Shri P.S. Patwalia, learned Senior Counsel has appeared for those candidates who were appointed in the batch of 2001 and were issued appointment letters but were not issued posting orders. He has fairly considered before us that his clients would be satisfied even if they are given appointment now with further posting orders thereby they would not cause any prejudice to any of the judicial officers who have been appointed prior to his clients. Some of the candidates/officers have been reappointed in the selection which was held exclusively for those candidates who had appeared in the earlier batches of 1998 to 2001 but for some reason or the other, either their services were terminated or they were not issued posting orders. One such candidate being Manoj Kumar, having been appointed in 2004, is not pressing his Special Leave Petitions Nos. 8824-51 of 2009 which stand dismissed. 26. It is not in dispute any more that the candidates were given fresh opportunity to appear for selection for the aforesaid post in the exams exclusively held for them in the year 2004. Out of 57 such candidates, 20 candidates were reselected and they were given benefit of original appointment. As many of these candidates are the respondents and have worked as judicial officers for some period and it has also not been proved or established completely against them that they had indulged in malpractice in examinations, we are of the view that they should also be given reappointment and posting orders to the existing vacancies in the State of Punjab and if no vacancy exists, Mr. Sharan has assured the court that the State will create supernumerary posts for them but they would not be entitled to get all the benefits as have been granted to them vide the impugned judgment. 27. Sharan has assured the court that the State will create supernumerary posts for them but they would not be entitled to get all the benefits as have been granted to them vide the impugned judgment. 27. However, it should not be construed that our judgment is giving seal of approval to the judgment of the Full Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court but with an intention to work out the equities and to do complete justice between the parties and in view of the earlier judgment of this Court in Kahlon easel that tainted candidates be separated from untainted, meaning thereby that this Court did not accept the submission that it was not practically possible to do so; and further this Court had taken note of reselection held in 2004 in para 92 of the judgment, but held that the effect thereof would be subject to this case, this is the only via media, through which the respondents could also be granted relief as it could not be established that even otherwise, they would have been declared as unsuccessful candidates. Precisely, that is the reason we have moulded the reliefs granted to the respondents by the High Court as our order is not likely to affect seniority of any of the judicial officers, who had already been working prior to the respondents. We are conscious of the fact that by this procedure, there is no likelihood of any offshoots of the said order and hopefully the whole controversy triggered in the year 1998, would stand settled for all times to come. 28. Out of the candidates who were selected in the batch of 1998, six officers/candidates had already put in more than three years of service. We have been given to understand that in the year 2007, there -was selection to the post of Civil Judge (Judicial Division) and 45 candidates were appointed on 14-3-2008. This clearly shows that the said six officers of the batch of 1998 have already put in more than three years of service. Thus, these six candidates/officers would be placed above the batch of 45 candidates who were selected on 14-3-2008 and were issued posting orders subsequent thereto. The rest of the candidates that is to say, remaining 11 candidates will take place in the seniority list immediately after last appointment made in the service of Civil Judge (Judicial Division). 29. Thus, these six candidates/officers would be placed above the batch of 45 candidates who were selected on 14-3-2008 and were issued posting orders subsequent thereto. The rest of the candidates that is to say, remaining 11 candidates will take place in the seniority list immediately after last appointment made in the service of Civil Judge (Judicial Division). 29. Out of the candidates who had been selected for the year 2001 batch, five candidates got selected in the test conducted by the High Court in the year 2004. Thus, for them no further directions are required to be given. Out of the remaining batch of 2001, eight candidates have been named in the FIR and only three candidates i.e. Shri Gurkirpal Singh Sekhon, Mahesh Kumar and Harprit Singh even though selected but remained to be appointed. These candidates shall also be issued appointment orders as the last candidates in the seniority list. 30. The candidates who are to be given reappointments are entitled to the period of service which was rendered by them would be reckoned for the purpose of pension. They would not be entitled to get any arrears of salary or any financial benefits consequent upon the reappointment. The period of service rendered by these candidates would also be reckoned for the purpose of ACP/promotion. Actual service be counted for the purpose of pension and fixation of notional increments without any financial benefit or arrears. 31. The appeals are disposed of accordingly. SLPs (C) Nos. 30882-84 of 2008 32. Heard. The special leave petitions are dismissed. SLPs (C) Nos. 8824-51of 2009 33. The special leave petitions are dismissed as not pressed.