Sandeep Barar and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and Others - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....the department's appeal. since the finding of the appellate assistant commissioner and also of the tribunal was arrived at by ignoring the relevant facts found by the income-tax officer, the finding was vitiated by an error of law. the high court has also committed an obvious error as to when the ferozepore firm was constituted and that error has led to the further error that the ferozepore firm was sub- partnership in relation to the assessee-firm. moreover the decisions in commissioner of income-tax v. sivakasi match exporting co. [1954] 1 s.c.r. 18 and commissioner of income- tax v. bagyalakshmi & co. [1965] 2 s.c.r. 22 do not apply to the facts of this case, because, the observations in those cases are based on the fact that the person admitted as a partner in the firm seeking registration was admitted as an individual, whereas in the present case one of the partners of the firm seeking registration was a partner in his re- presentative capacity. thus the question in the instant case was a substantial question of law which has not been settled. therefore, the high court should have directed the tribunal to refer the question. [188 h; 190 h. 189 h; 188 a- b; 192 b-d].....superseded by the instructions dated august 6, 1986.c) we strike-down the instructions issued by director of sports contained in memorandum sports sda-vii-86-87-8895 dated 16.9.1986 (mentioned as august 6, 1986 in the high court judgment) (annexure 'c' in c.a. 4408/89) and direct that the same be not taken into consideration while finalising the selection.d) admission to all the seven seats (six to mbbs and one to bds) be made as directed by us in this order above, three of the respondents namely amandeep kaur sahota, blinder-deep singh dhanj and navdeep walia have already been admitted as a result of the high court order. in the interest of justice we direct the respondent state of punjab to create three additional seats with the approval of the medical council of india and if such an approval is granted, then these three students be accommodated against the additional seats.

Judgment:

ORDER

Kuldip Singh, J.

1. Special leave granted.

2. We pronounce our conclusions in the appeals and a reasoned judgment shall be delivered later on. We allow the appeals and set aside the judgment of the High Court dated September 13, 1989 delivered in Civil Writ Petition No. 10623 of 1989. We also set aside the consequential judgments of the High Court dated September 18, 1989 in Civil Writ Petition Nos. 10855 of 1989 and 9745 of 1989. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 10623 of 1989 and 10855 of 1989 filed by those petitioners in the High Court are dismissed. Civil Writ Petition 9745 of 1989 is disposed of in terms of this order.

We direct as under:

a) Admissions, in the three State medical colleges and two State dental colleges for the session commenced in the year 1989, to the seats reserved in favour of sportsmen/sportswomen be made in accordance with the Government of Punjab, Deptt. of Health & Family Welfare notification dated April 21, 1989 (Annexure 'A' in C.A. 4408/1989) read with Government of Punjab, Deptt. of Education instructions dated August 6, 1986 (excluding para 2 which has already been struck down) (Annexure 'B' in C.A. 4408/89).

b) We hold that the Government instructions dated August 30, 1984 providing weightage in the various grades are no longer operative and had been superseded by the instructions dated August 6, 1986.

c) We strike-down the instructions issued by Director of Sports contained in memorandum Sports SDA-VII-86-87-8895 dated 16.9.1986 (mentioned as August 6, 1986 in the High Court judgment) (Annexure 'C' in C.A. 4408/89) and direct that the same be not taken into consideration while finalising the selection.

d) Admission to all the seven seats (six to MBBS and one to BDS) be made as directed by us in this order above, three of the respondents namely Amandeep Kaur Sahota, Blinder-deep Singh Dhanj and Navdeep Walia have already been admitted as a result of the High Court order. In the interest of justice we direct the respondent State of Punjab to create three additional seats with the approval of the Medical Council of India and if such an approval is granted, then these three students be accommodated against the additional seats.