1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 16929 of 1989. Date of Decision: 13.1.2010 *** Ram Kumar Bodla .. Petitioner VS. The State of Haryana & Ors. .. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. Ravinder Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.C. Gupta, Sr. DAG Haryana. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioner underwent the physical test as well as interview between 20.8.1989 to 22.8.1989, pursuant to an advertisement made for filling up the vacancies of Constables in District Kurukshetra, in the State of Haryana. He stood at Sr. No.167 in the list while the vacancies were 160 and thus, was kept in the waiting list. Since more vacancies were allocated to the Kurukshetra District, the Government started exhausting the list of candidates in waiting. As per pleadings, the candidate at Sr. No.166 in the waiting list was medically examined as per Rule 12.16 of the Punjab Police Rules. The petitioner was also medical examined as per Rules on 20.10.1989 but was not assigned the enrolment number because by that time he had completed the age of 27 years being born of 4.10.1962 and thus, was not enrolled being over-age. He was not granted relaxation by the competent authority, leading to the institution of present writ petition invoking the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court, as enshrined under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking direction to the respondents to depute the petitioner for training to Madhuban as recruitted Constable. In the reply filed on behalf of the respondents, the prayer made by the petitioner has been opposed. It has been contended that as per Rules, 2 a candidate must not be above the age of 27 years at the time of enrollment and the age at the time of selection is irrelevant. Since after the enrollment of candidate at Sr. No.166, the process is initiated for the enrollment of the petitioner, his age was calculated and was found over-age and thus, accordingly he was not assigned enrollment number. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the paper book carefully. As per rule 12.15 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (hereinafter referred to as Rules, for brevity), no person shall be appointed to the post of Constable by direct recruitment who is less than 18 years or more than 27 years of age and as per the prevailing provisions at that time, the age has to be taken into account from the date of enrollment. Further perusal of Rule 12.16 makes it clear that no right to be enrolled shall be accrued to a candidate only on the basis of selection but subject to the compliance of other requisites like medical examination prior to being enrolled and as such age has to be calculated while reckoning the date of enrollment as a criteria. In the instant case, admittedly, as per Annexure P-1 the petitioner was medically examined on 20.10.1989, the date on which he had crossed the age of 27 years. Thus, it cannot be said that the action of the respondents in not enrolling the petitioner, being over-age, is either illegal or perverse. The petition being wholly without merit is dismissed. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE January 13,2010 Jiten