68 141 CWP No 2914 of2010 ma1 In the HighCourt ofPunjabandHaryanaat Cllandigarh Dateofdecisionl11082010 1 CWPNo2914 of2010 Vs StateofHaryana and others 2 CWP No427 of2009 W 0 Krishan Kumar and olhers Vs StateofHaolanaand othcrs 11D 3 CWP 1V03329of2010 1 RajbirSinghand others Vs StateoflIaryana and olhers C 4CHT No1403of2009 4t 2 Prem Singh Vs StateofHaryana andothcrs 5 CWP A03401 nf2010 E1IC Kulbir Singhand anotherVs StateofHaryanaalld others 06 6 CWP No 7536 of201 0 0 KaptanSinghVs StateofHaryanaand others Ct 2 7 CWP Nre7203 cf2010 Z 0 a iOesh Rai an2 0zhersVs State0f14arvanaend othcrs 8 CWPN081470f2010 EHC Ram Mehar and othersVs StateofHaryana and others 9 CWP No6443 of2009 C Jai Pal and another Vs StateofHaryanaand others 10 CWPAT 6619 of2009 Satyauran EHC Vs State ofHaryanaand others 11 CWPNo104870f2009 Ilcad Constablc Ashok Kunlar Vs State ofHaryanaand othcrs e12 CWP No 12237 of2009 r Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 69 r5 CWP No 2914 of2010 2 NarenderKumar ConstableVs StateofHaryana and others 13 CWP No 12248of2009 Jit SinghEHC Vs StateofHaryanaand others 14 CWPNo 12253of2009 SubhashChanderEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others C 15 CWP No 16975of2009 0 Krishan Kumar EHC Vs StateofHaryana and others 16 CWP No18430of2009 Cao PannaLal EHC Vs StateofHaryana andothers 17 CWP No 18863of2009 2 Raj Kumar and anotherVs StateofHarjanaand others 18 CVv Nc79 19 cf 2009 1 Kamal Parkash EHC Vs Statec1fHanTanaand otllers O6 19CWPNo636of2010 CO LadConstable RajbalaVs StateofHaryana and others 2 2 20CWP N027750f2010 CL Rishi Parshad and othersVs StateofHaryana and others 21CWP No2875of2010 1 LadyConstableSumanVs StateofHaryanaand others 22 CWPN02068 of2010 4e Sada Ram E Vs State ofHaryanaand others 23CWP No3338of2010 KaptainSinghand another Vs StateofHaryanaand others 24 CWP No 3367 of2010 EHC Mohan Lal Vs State ofHaryanaand others Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 70 rl CWP No2914 of2010 0 25 CWl702556 of2010 Hans Ram and othersVs StateofHaryana andothers 26 CWP No 4258 of2010 Hari Krishan HC Vs Financial Commissionerc PrincipalSecretary to GovernmentofHaryanaand others 27CWPNoA274of2010 m C Amar SinghEHC Vs StateofHaryana andothers 0 28 CWP No 4749 of2010 C1 f2 Mohinder SinghEAS1 and anotherVs SuiteofHaryana and others 5 29 CWPNo 4765 of2010 2 ChhljuRam and anotherVs StateofHaryana and others 30CWP N049600f2010 0 RajbirSinghand others Vs StateofHaryanaand others 08 31 CWP NoA963 of2010 CtO SatbirSinghVs State ofHaryanaand others WA 32 CWP No 7923 of2010 83ea JaivirSingha1 othersVs StateofHaryana and others 33 CWPNn 6031 of2010 7 1 HardayalHC and othersVs StateofHaryanaand others Cev CORAM1 HONBLE MR JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present Mr SlC Redhu Mrikram Singh MrlIT Yadav MrDinesh Malik Mrritam Saini Mrurender Lamba MrlP Singh Advocatesfor the petitioners MrRS Kundu Addl AG Haryanaforthe respondents PEIVOD KOHLI J Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 71 1 CWPN0914of2010 4 On the basis of common and identical issuesboth on factsand law all these petitions are beingdecidedbythis common order The entire controversyrelates to the of Rule 133 ofthe PunjabPolice Rules 1934 as applicable to the Stateof Haryana and amended vide Punjab Police Halana Amendment Rules 2001 m C hereinafter refrred r0 as the Rules9 This rule relatesto for 0 Lower School Course and for enlistingof the eligibleofficers in List B1 C for their promotion The amendedrule subject matter of debatein the C C5 presentwrlt petitionsis hereunder 1 37Selection of candidatesfor admission to Z courses at the Police TrainingCollege List Cl B in Form 13 shall be maintainedby each of Police It shall include the 06 r llames of all constables selected for admission eme Z to the Lower School Course to be held at the C Police TrainingCollegeSelection to the list B shall be made ln the month of Januaryeach 1 yearand shall be limited to the number of seats allotted to the district for the year The number C ofseats in Lower School Course in a year shall be on the basis of cxistingvacancies and the vacancies likely to be created within one year 111 the respectiveunit 550Io of the seats allotted to a unit lIl the Lower School Course shall be filled in on the basis of a colnpetitive Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 72 rl CWP N029140f2010 5 eanlination 3596 on the basis of senlOrlt Cumfitnessaild 1096on the basis of COtlSlSlelit performance in Gold or Silver Medal in All India Police 1 MeetlNationalGamesor displayof C braveryduringthe course of performance of 0 C40 Officialduty Selectionofpersonsagainst50 C seats 10 listllower school on the basis of merit shall be dorieby a Promotioll 4 Z Committeeon the basisof c 1 Examinationofservicesand 08 2 A competitive test hereinaftercalled B test9lnl Z C a9Prade bl Law and practicalpolicework aiid 3 An interview C 2 i9 All constables irrespectiveof their educational qualificationsshall be eligibleto appear for Bml test ifthey are under the age of 35 years and have completed 5 years of servlce on 1S day of Januaryof the yeat ln which selection is made However if a Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 73 r CHIPN029140f2010 6 constable belongingto reserved category who is recruited after attaining the age of 27 yearsas per Governmentinstructionslorders then he shall be allowed to appear for minimum three conseooS a chances aer m C compIetionof 6ree vears of service even ifhe 0 C has crossed the age of 35 years up to a Z C mlnimum of 10 years Z ii All Constables of their L educationalqualiflcations shall be eligibleto be broughton List B seniority cum merit 08 hasis if thev are Uncer ttle ago 4 40 vu10 0 l CQ 1 aloa nave completed5 veess of serviceon the e Z flrst dayof Januaryof the year in which selectionis made 35 The State ofHaryanaissued instructionsdated 13022007 prescribingthe minlmum ment to fulfill the criteria for seniority 1 cumfitness relyingupon the observations of this Court in the case of G Naresh Kumar Vs State of Harvana and others CWP No952 of 20041dccided on 05112004 DlrectoiGeneral of PojiceHarytlllae issued these instructions prescribingmlnirnum bench marks 120r selection to BI list under 350Io quota The relevant extract of the instructions dated 13022007 lnnexure P79 in CWP No6427 of Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 74 rl CWPN09140f2010 7 2009 is hereunderl In Vlew ofthe Hollble High lll the Naresh Kuniar case supra it has been decidedto flx the benchmarks for fitnessunder 35Io quota The m Q assessment of service record should be made 0 C OIl the basis of education trainingcourses passedcommendationcertificates and length C of service etc as givenin PPR 137 All the Z candidates who obtain a minimum 31 marks r C or more would be deemed to be fit tor Ct selection of B l seats against35Io quotaon the o basisof interse seniority ofthe candidates and oo r for all such candidatesinteese seniority would 2 be the sole criteria for deputingon their turn under 35Io quotalIl Vlew of the explicitorder of High Court Please take further necessary 1 action 5t The validityof these instructions has been upheldby this Court in Hawa Singh Vs State ofHaryanaand others CWP No1194 of20051decided on 140512008 There are three sets of writ petitionsunder consideration The same are broadlycategorisedin the followingmannerl a9 the eligibilityofthe candidates who appeared in 55Io merit Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 75 01 T CWP Nr 2914 of2010 e promotlonquotaunderRule 13 i9to be consideredfor promotion under35Io on basis underrule 137 29 iil even if theyhave failed under55Ioquota b9 considerationofthe candidateswith less than 35 years of age as on Istdayof Januaryof the year in which selection is made in 35 1 r quota 0 C C interse senioritv of the candidates on the basis of beIlchmarks ln temlS Of DGPs instructionsdated 13O22007 C5 From thereadingofRule 13 it emergesas follows C Z that 55Io of the seats allotted to a unit lll the Lower School a Course are meant to be fllled 1Il on the basis of competitive C et examinatlOIl C45 b 35Io of the seats on the basisof seniorityfitness and CQ e cl 1096sezts on the basisof consistentoutstarui vm p0ormar1 2 jobslsports etc CL Selection against55Io quota 1S to be made by the Depental PromotionalCommittee All the constables oftheir educational Who are lessthan 35 years ofageand have completed5 years of Service on Ist day of Januaryof the year of C selection are eligibleto appear for Bl test under merit seats of 55V0 quot Siioilarly all the constables irrespecti vc of tlicir educational quali8cationhavingcornpletedflve years ofservice and 111 the age of 40 years on the Ist day of Januaryof the year of selection Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 76 P 1 CWP N02914 of2010 are eligibleto be brought on list B1 on the basis of merit against35Io quota Sportspersolls undcr l096 qota are to be separately considered subjectto eligibility lIl the above iwo categones m 4 The controversyrelatingto the eligibilityofthe candidates 0 who failed to secure the requisite merit in the examination C under 55Io quota to be again considered under 35Io senioritume C5 ment quota cameto be consideredby a Division Bench of this Court Z ln Naresh Kumars case lpral This Division Bench judgmentwas chailengedbcfore tne Honble Court 10 SpecialLeave t0 4 AppeaiCivi No10409 of2005 which has been dismissedin limine 08 on 10052005 ClO A similar issue came up for considerationbeforethis Court aw Z lIl the case of Hawa Singh Vs State of Harvana and others CWP No1194 of20059decided on 14052008 After admissionofthe writ petitionbythe Honble Division Bench the matter was consideredby a 1 learned SingleJudge of this Court for Snal disposalon 29 12006 The learned SingleJudge ofthis Court was ofthe opinionthat certain C provisions of Rule 137 ofthe rules were not broughtto the notice of the Division Bench and on that basis a reference was made for consideration of the writ petitionand other eonnected nlaUers by a Division Bench of this Court The aforesaid writ petitioncame to be heard by a Division Bench ofthis Court The Honble Division Bench Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 77 J CWPN07914of2010 10 vide its judgmentdated 14052008 affirmedthe ratio 111 Naresh Kumarscase supra9 with thefollowing observations In view of the facts mentioned above these wnt petitionsare allowed in the same terms as 10 Naresh Kumars case supra The m 0 are directed to deputethe 0 C to the first Ower Scllnol Course 45 which will coimence after the pronouncement of judgment lIl this case However The C Z petitionershall be deemedto halle cltini Oed 1 tl C the Lower School Course from the datewhen other constables have qualifiedwhose names 08 were approvedto undergo Lower School CQ 0 em Course vide select list Annexure P1 It is made 2 1 clear that if by gettingleuOSDooli5Iedatc I14 ta2 Clw passing the Lowcr School Course the petltioner becameeligible for promotionthen he will get only deemed benefits without gettingany actual financial beneflts ln view of C principleof no work no pay as laid down by their Lordshipsof the Honble SupremeCourt lIl Union of India and another vs Tarsem Lal and others O2006910 suprem COUit Cmsoo 145 91 Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 78 Tl CWP No 2914 of2010 11 Honble the Division Bench further considered the validityof the instructionsdated 13022007 and upheldits validitywith the following observationsl So far as CWP No609 or 21107 io concerried lri that writ petitlonsclect list preparedto undergo C Lower School Course on the basis of ilnstructlons 0 dated 13022007 as referred to above has been CA challengedAs has been held earlier above said C lnstructlons are perfectlyjustifiedand are 111 e consonance with the directions issued by this 2 Court in NareshKumars case supra9 37 r The claims of some of the writ petitionersfor deputing to Lower Schooi Course hae 5een jecledOll the groundthat theyhaving c6 failed in 5596 mcrit qocta are not entitledto be consideredfor beingbrought C elt on List B1 in 35Io quota The claims of some ofthe writ petitiuners have amWo Z beenrejectedfor beingbrought in List Bl under 35Io quotaon theground C that theywere of less than 35 years of age as on Ist dayof Januaryof the year of selection In some cases the claims have been rejectedfor non achievingthe minimum 31 bench marks ln terms ofthe DGPs instructions dated 13022007 In Naresh Kumars case 6suprathe Honble Division 4 Bench ruled ihe eligibility ofthe constaloles for their considcratiun DO Ill 5596 and 35Io quota This judment has atlained finality Tle SLP has also been dismissedy the Honble Supreme Court The ratio of tho said judgmenthas been reiterated 111 Hawa Sings cases supr as also in Constle Dharmbir l State of Haryana and others 2009 19RSJ 310 whereinthe following observations have been madel Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 79 r1 CWPN029140f2010 ne12 12 So therearc three distinct 13e with their own qualiftcationsand for eligibilityfor consideration There is no bar to considerationof a constable in any categoryif he fulfills theeligibilitycrlterla 1ee if he is eligibleln w C all three categorieshe has a statutoryright to 0 considerationin a11 three categoriesThe Rules Ca do not categorize or requiresome mlnlmum age 1 for eligibiliiyunder aoil ofthc categoriesWhatit specifiesis the upi3erageIiinit for consideratiou 2 uncler a particularcategory Despite these instructions certain 1SSUes referred to hereinabove have againcroppedup The controversyregardingthe olj CQ eligibilityofcandidates under 35 years ofagefor beingbrought on List B for 35Io quota againcame up for considerationby anotherflvlsloll BellCil 7 Z of this Court in Dharmbirs case 6supra9 and Balrai Singhand others Vs CL State ofHarvana and others 2009 29RSJ 463 Irl Dhor2birs case supral a Division Bench ofthis Court held as under 7 17 A conjointreadingofboth the sulerules would show that only the upper age limit e4eve has been prescribed under the rules and no minimum age has been prescribed either under subwrule2 0 or subule 2 iio which means that if a constable fulfills the requirement of the upper ageand the other qualificationsprescribedunder the respectivecategory as pcr sulule 2 there 1S Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 80 l 7 t CWPNo 2914 of2010 3 no bar to his considerationunder eachof them Meaningtherebya constable who is eligible 111 one categoryunder Rule 137 62 can also be considered in the other categoryunder Rule 137 21 ii of the PunjabPolice Rldcs 9C there is no 1 bircation 5etween the rules as 82r as the 0 eligibility 1S concerned with regard to the 0 minimum age as none is prescribed C 18 The minimum age if prescribedby way of r executlve lnstructions would go againstthe Z lllterest of the Constables who are otherwise eligibleunder the statutoryRules Rule 133 r il confers a rightwhich a Constable attainson oll r10 the 5asis of his sciliority111 the service As and a when his turn conles based on the scnioritya risht Z to consideration devolves on hirn This righton Llw the basis ofhis senioritycannot be deprivedon the basis of executive instructions This would be 111 4 contraventlon to the statutoryrules and therefore C not sustainable 22 Vhatemergesfrom the above discussions 18 that a constable who lias letcd 5 veers of vlliO2 C0 servlce on the Tsl day of Januaryof the year ln which the selection is made is under the age of35 years and is eligible for consideration and selection for includinghis name in List Bml of Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 81 r WP 11102914of2010 14 elected constables for admission to Lower School Course under the 5594 quotaon the basis of merit as per Rule 137 62 i9ofthe PunjabPolice Rules 1934 and having in the test l9 and failed or was unable to get 1 enlistmentdue to lower merit can also claim r considerationand selection under the 35Io quota 0 CV on the basis of senioritycumneritas per Rule C 133 ii9 if he 1S eligible under both the categones 39 e 2 As noticed above the conslablcs who have attainedminimum m 31 bench marks under 35Io quotahave beenignoredand their juniorswere deputedto the course on the groundthat theyare more merltorlous having 06 betterbench marks This issue is in fact covered under Naresh Kumars Cr case supra9and came to be clarifled in Balrai Sins cass supra W2 Z wherein it has been held that whereeevera junior has been deputedfor Cl Lower School Course ignoringthe claim ofthe seniorsmerelyon the basis ofthe higherbench marks the senior be deputedfor the course and he will r be deemed to have passedthe course from the datehis juniorhos qualied 4e In such situation scnior wili retain his seniority aee There is another aspect of the matter The DGPs instructions dated 13022007 are onlyprospectiveln naturee Prior to these instructions no bench marks were prescribedunder the statutoryrules and thus all those conb1es who acquiredeligibility prior to issuancc of these instructionshave been denied the to the Lower School Course for non achieving the minimum bench marks It is settled law that Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 82 1 1 CHTPN0 2914 of2010 15 govemmentinstructions cannot overrule the statutoryrules Thus these instructionscannot be pressed lnto servlCe to deprivethe constablesof their right for for nothavingachievedthe minimum bench marks as prescribedunder these instructions issued later Thus such of the constables who became eligiblepriorto issuance ofthese instructions and m C ignoredfor not achieving the minimum bellch marks ore tn be deputedfor 0 ower School Course and on successfuIcolnpletionofthe cours theyare Ca to be treated senior than their juniorswho were earlier deputed to the C Lower School Course In other words theywill retain their seniority for beingbrought on List B 1 that theywere deputed for the Z course Iater than their juniorsor theydid not achieve minimum bench r marks Cr I Similarly such ofthe constableswho are ignoredon account Otj of achievingless than the prescribedbench marks then their juniorsare e also ertitled tc be depotod to the colirsc and or completionofthe same Wlll va Z retain thelr senioriolover theirjuniors CL In some of the writ petitionsthe constables have already completedthe Lower School Course but they have been denied the 1 seniontyover their juniorson the ground that the juniorswere either havingbetter bench marks or deputedfor the course prior in time than the Ce writ petitioners In view of the above observations these writ petitionersshall be deemed to be senior to their juniorsdeputedcmllicr 4Itt occount of better bench marks or on any other ground of eligibility To sum up these petitionsare disposedofwith thefollowingdirectionsl i9 Such ofthe constleslpetitioners who have failed in 55Io ment quota Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 83 7 CWPNo9140f2010 l 16 areentitledto be consideredfor beingbrought on List B1 under 35Io quota on the principleof seniorityunnerit providedtheyhave the requisite experience and are otherwiseeligibleuririer tne ruies ii such ofthe constobleswho were lessthan 35 years ofageas on thedy oftheir consideration but not more than 40 years theywill be entitledto be m C brought on List B1 bydeputingthemto Lower SchoolCourse 9 0 iiil thepetitionerswho acquiredeligibilitypriorto the DGPs instructions C dated 13022007 will be deputed for the course without consideringthe questionof minimum bench marks as prescribedunder the government C lnstructlonS and in their cases seniorityand other eligibilitycnteria 2 prescribed uoer the rules will be enoughfor their devutarlon l 112e000rse m Cl ivl the petitioners who became clioible for depulation after the issuanceof the instructionsdated 13022007 and have achieved the minimum bench 08 marks be deputedto the course their juniorshave better C bench marks S Z V9 interse seniorityof the constableswill be detennined on the basis of Clm their seniorityin their respective districtsin the and not on the basis of passingof the Lower School Course in all such cases who are 1 ignored by the above directions However the interese seniorityof constables will not be goveinedby the above directions where senior was Vee nored on account of pendencyof any disciplinaryproceedingsor who suffered any other disqualiflcationfor deputation to Lower School Course vil deputationof the petitionersshall be made on the basis of their seniority in their respectivedistricts and againstthe available vacancies Let the claim ofthe petitioners be considered in the light ofthe above directions and their deputation whererer required be made 111 Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 84 9 1CWPN02914of2010 7 accordancewith the abovedirections A copy of this order be placedon the record of each connected Sle aem 112010 PERMOD KOHLI9 BLS JUDGE m C 1 0 Notel Whether to be referredto thcRepolter2YES CA C5 P Z 2 C 08 CQ e 2 Z 10 Parkash Om 2014.05.03 11: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document