67 4 e CWPN029140f2010 1 ln theHighCourt ofPunjab andHaryana at Dateofdecisionl l l 082010 1 CWPN02914 of2010 Vs StateofHarvanaand olhers 4 2 CWP No 6427 of2009 t1 Krishan Kunlar and others Vs StateofHaryanaand othcrs 0 3 CWP N03329 of201 0 C Z RajbirSinh and othersVs StateofIIaryana and others C0 12 4 CWP Nc1403 of2009 Prem Singh Vs StateofHaryanaanclothcrs Z V2 5 CWP No3401 nf201 0 C t EElC Kulbir Singhand anotherVs State0fHaryanaalld otllcrs Z 05 6 CWPN075360f2010 OD KaptanSinghVs Slate ofMaryanaand otllers W2 7 CWPN0903of2010 e 10eshRajand otilers Vs StateofHaryana and olhers 8 CWPN8147 of2010 EHC Ram Mehar and othersVs State0fI3aryana and others 9 CWP No 6443 of2009 C Jai Pal and anotherVs StateofHaryanaand othors 1 0 CWP No 6619 of2009 Satyawan E11C Vs State ofHaryanaand others 1 1 CWP No10487 of2009 Head Constable Ashok Kumar Vs State ofHaryanaand others 12 CWP No 12237 of2009 b 1 Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 68 CWPN029140f2010 2e NarenderKumar ConstableVs StateofHaryana andothers 13 CWP No 12248of2009 Jit SinghEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others 14 CWP No2253 of2009 SubhashChanderEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others m C 15 CWP N 16975of2009 0 Krishan Kumar EHC Vs StateofHaryana and others 0 16 CWP N0184300f2009 X CA9 PannaLal EHC Vs StateofHaryana and others X 17CWPNo18863of2009 Z RajKumar andanother Vs StateofHaryana and others P C 18 CWP No 18919of2009 C Kamal ParkashEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others 08 19 CWP No 636 of2010 CQ e LadyConstableRajbala Vs StateofHaryana and others mew Z 20CWPN02775of2010 Ll Rishi Parshadand othersVs StateofHaryana and others 21 CWPN0 2875of2010 LadyConstableSumanVs StateofHaryana and others 22 CWP No2968 of2010 e Sada Ram EHC Vs State ofHaryanaand others 23 CWP No 3338 of2010 KaptainSinghand another Vs StateofHaryanaand others 24CWPNo3367of2010 EHC Mohan Lal Vs StateofHaryanaand others 1 Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 69 91CWPN029140f2010 3 25 CWP N03556 of2010 Hans Ram and othersVs StateofHaryana and others 26CWPNo4258of2010 Hari Krishan HC Vs Financial Commissioneri PrincipalSecretary to GovernmentofHaryana and others 27 CWPNoA274 of2010 m r 2 AmarSinghEHC Vs State andothers 0 C 28 CWP NoA749 of2010 Mohinder SinghEASI and anotherVs StateofHaryana and others C Z 29 CWP No 4765 of2010 Z ChhajuRain and anotherVs StateofHaryana and others 30 CWP No 4960 of2010 ct RajbirSinghand othersVs StateofHaryana and others 08 31CWPN049630f2010 m SatbirSinghVs StateofHaryana andothers t Z 32 CWP N07923of2010 CL Jaivir Singhand othersVs StateofHaryana and others 33 CWPNo6031of2010 Hardayal HC and othersVs StateofHaryana and others C CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE PERMOD KOI Presentl Mr S Redhu Mrikram SinghMrl Yadav MrDinesh Malik MrPritam Saini Mrurender Lamba MrRP SinghAdvocatesfor the petitioners MtRS Kundu Addl AG Haryanaforthe respondents PERMOD KOHLL J Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 70 CWPNo2914of2010 On the basisof common and identical1SSues bothon factsand law all thesepetitions are beingdecidedbythis common order The entire controversyrelates to the of Rule 133 ofthe PunjabPolice Rules 1934 as applicable to the StateofHaryana and amended vide Punjab Police HaryanaAmendment Rules 2001 a r hereinafterreferredto as the Rules This rule relatesto for 0 Lower SchoolCourseandfor enlisting of the eligibleofficersin List C3 for their promotion The amendedrule subjectmatter of debate in the X C5 presentwrit petitionsis hereunderl Z 137Selection of candidatesfor admission to 2 courses at the Police laining College List D C 13 6inForm 1339shall be maintainedby each X of Police It shall include the 06 Cll names of all constablesselected for admission 2 Z to the Lower School Course to be held at the Clm Police TrainingCollegeSelection to the IistB shall be made lIl the month of Januaryeach yearand shall be limited to the number of seats 1 allotted to the district for the year The number CeeV of seats in Lower School Course 111a year shall be on the basis of existingvacancies and the vacancies likelyto be created within one year 111 the respectiveunlt 50 of the seats allotted to a unit 111the Lower School Course shall be filled in on the basis of a competitive Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 71 0 J CWPN0l914of2010 5 1A examination 35Io on the basis of 1 cummfitnessand 10Io On the basis of consistent in Gold or Silver Medal in All India Police MeetlNational Games or displayof m braveryduringthe course of of 0 Cuo official duty Selection of personsagainst55Io X seats ln listllower school on the basis of merit C5 I shall be done by a Promotiotl Z CcIinmitteeon thebav lf1 r Examination of servicesand Z o6 2 A test called 1 CQ test9inl eww Z 2 CL a9Prade b1Law andpracticalpolicework aild 3 An Interview C 2 6i9 All constables of their educational qualificationsshall be eligibleto appearfor Bl test if they are under the age of 35 years and have completed5 years of service on 1 day of Januaryof the year in which selection is made However if a Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 72 1 CWPN029140f2010 6 constable to reserved category who is recruitedafter attaining the ageof 27 yearsas per Government instructionslorders then he shall be allowed to appear for minimum three consecutive chances after m C of flve years of serviceeven ifhe 0 Ceo has crossed the age of 35 years up to a Z minlmum of 10 years C Z ii9 All onstables of their educationaI shall be eligibleto C 2C be broughton List B seniority cum ment c basis if theyare under the age of 40 years CQ e and have 5 years of service on the 2 Z 2 flrst dayof Januaryof the vear in which Clm selection is made 35 The State ofHaryanaissued instructions dated 13022007 prescribingthe minimum merit to fulfill the criteria for senioritv 1 cumefltness relyinguponthe observations of this Court in the case of 1 Naresh Kurnat Vs State of Harvana and others CWP No952 of 20049decided Oll 051 12004 Director General of Police Haryana issued these instructions prescribing tninimum bench marks for selection to BeI list under 3 5Io quota The relevant extract of the lnstructions dated 13022007 64nnexureI79 in CWP No6427 of Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 73 r CWP N02914 of2010 7 2009 is hereunderl 3 In view ofthe Honble HighCourtjudgment in the Naresh Kumar case supra9it has been decided to fix the bench marksfor fitnessunder 35Io quota The m r assessmentof service record should be made 0 CaO on the basis of education trainingcourses Z passedcommendation certificates and length 0 Z of service etc as givenin PPR 137 All the 2 candidates ho obtaill a ininimum 31 marks Im or more would be deemed to be flt for Lr C Z selection of B l seats against35Io quotaon the 08 basis of interse seniorityof the candidatesand Ctl for all such candidates interse senioritv would 2 Z be the sole criteria for deputingOll their turn CL under 35Io quotaln view of the explicitorder of HighCourt Please take further necessary 2 action 95 The validityof these instructions has been upheldbythis Ce Court in Hawa Singh Vs State ofHarvana and others CWP No1194 of20051decided on 14052008 There are three sets of writ petitionsunder consideration The same are broadlycategorisedin the following mannerl a9 the eligibilityofthe candidates who appearedin 550Iomerit Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 74 P1CWPN029140f2010 8 1 promotlonquotaunderRule 13 621iJto beconsideredfor promotion under35Io on basis underrule 13 62Jiil even if theyhavefailed under55Ioquota b9 considerationofthe candidateswith less than 35 years ofageas on Ist dayof Januaryof the yearin which selection is made in 35Io m Cr quotaof 0 C 9 interse seniorityof the candidates on the basis of bench marks Ca3 111ternlsof DGPs instructionsdated 13022007 49 From thereadingofRule 137 l9 it emergesas folIowsl C Z 6a1 that 55Io of the seatsllotted to a unit in the Lower School Course are meant to be filled 111 OI1 the basis of C Z examlnation O8 6b9 35Io ofthe seats on the basisofsenioritylnltness and C0 r 6c9 10Io seats on the basis of consistent 1Il W2 Z etc CL Selection against55Io quota 1S to be made by the Promotional Committee All the constables irrespective 1 oftheir educational qualification who are less than 35 years of age and have completed5 years of service on Ist dayof Januaryof the vear of e C seIection are eligibleto appear for B1 test under merit seats of 550Io quota Similarly all the constables irrespectiveof the ir educational qualiftcationhavingcompletedfive years of service and ln the age of 40 years on the Ist day of Januaryof the year of selection Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 75 CWPNo2914of2010 Il are eligibleto be brought on list Bel on the basis of senioritycum merit against35Io quota Sportspersons under 10Io quota are to be considered subjectto eligibility ln the above two categones m C The controversyrelating to the eligibilityof the candidates 0 who failed to secure the requisite mentin the examination Clo under 55Io quotato be againconsidered under 35Io seniorioln 0 Z merit quota cameto be consideredby a Division Bench of this Court 2 111Naresh Kumars case This Divisin Bench judgment was before the Honble Supreme Coui1 in SpecialLeave to C AppealCivil No10409 of2005 which hasbeen dismissedin limine 06 on 10052005 C0 A similar issuecame up for considerationbefore this Court Z in the case of Hawa Singh Vs State of Harvana and others 6CWP Ll No1194 of2005 decided on 14052008 After admissionofthe writ petitionby the Honble Division Bench the matter was considered bya learnedSingleJudgeof this Court for final disposalon 29 12006 The learned SingleJudgeofthis Court was ofthe opinionthat certain C provisionsof Rulel370ftheru1es were not broughtto the notice of the Division Bench and on that basis a reference was made for consideration of the writ petitionand other connected matters bv a Division Bench of this Court The aforesaid writ petitioncame to be heard by a Division Bench ofthis Court The Honble Division Bench Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 76 1 CWP No2914of2010 0 vide its dated 14052008 afflrmed the ratio in Naresh Kumars case upralwith the followingobservationsl In view of the facts mentioned above these wrlt petltionsare allowed in the same terms as 111 Nresh Kumars case supra9 The m r are directed to deputethe 0 4 petitionersl to the flrst Lower School Course Cm which will commence after the pronouncement 0 ofjudgmentln this case However The 4 2 petitioner sho11be deemcd to have qualifled 111 5 the Lower S 001 Course from the date when C Z other constables bave qualied whose names O8 were approvedto undergo Lower School ro Coursevide select list Annexure Pl It is made m3 Z clear that if by getting date of an passingthe Lower School Course the petitioner became eligiblefor promotionthen he will get only deemed benefits without gettingany actual financial benefits in view of C principleof no work no pay as laid down by their Lordshipsof the Honble SupremeCourt in Union of India and another vs Tarsem Lal and others 2006910 SupremeCourt Cases 145 99 Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 77 7 CWPN029140f2010 lle Honble the Division Bench further considered the validityof the instructionsdated 13022007 and uplleldits validitywith thefollowing observations So far as CWP N03609 of2007 is concerned lIl that writ petitionselect list prepared to undergo tr Lower School Course on the basis of iinstructions 0 dated 1302007 as referred to above has been 0 challengedAs has been held earlier above said 5 instructlons are perfectlyjustied and are ln consonance with the directions issued by this Z Court in NareshKumars case supra 2 Cr The claims of some of the writ petitionersfor deputing to Lower School Course have been rejected on the groundthat thel bll C98 failed in 55Io merit quotaare not entitledto be consideredfor beingbrougllt Q0 on List B1 in 35Io quota The claims ofsome ofthe writ petitioners have m Z beenrejectedfor beingbroughtin List B under 35Io quotaon theground thatthey were oflessthan 35 yearsof age as on Ist dayof Januaryof the year of selection In some cases the claims have been rejectedfor non achievingthe ininimum 31 bench marksin terms ofthe DGPs Lnstructiotls 1 dated 1302007 In Naresh Kumars case Osupra9 the Honble Division Cee Bench ruled the eligibility ofthe constables for their consideration both in 55Io and 35Io quota This judgmenthas attained finality The SLP has also been dismissed by the Honble SupremeCourt The ratio of the said judgmenthas been reiterated 111 Hawa SingWscases supra9 as also in Constable Dharmbir Vs State of Harvana and others 2009 19RSJ 310 whereinthe followingobservations have been madel Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 78 r CWPN029140f2010 2 13 So thereare threedistinct categories with their own and for eligibilityfor consideration There lS no bar to considerationof a constable in any categoryifhe fulfills the eligibilitycnteria if he is eligiblein 0 all three he has a statutoryrightto 0 consideration in all three categoriesThe Rules C do not categorize or requtre some minlmum age X C5 for eligibilityunder any ofthe categoriesWhat it specifiesis the upper aoe limit for consideration Z r under a par categOlY C Despitethese instructiotiIe certain issues referred to 4r Z hereinabove have againcroppedup he controversy regardingthe 05 eligibilityofcandidates under 35 yearsofagefor beingbrought on List Bl C for 35Io quota againcame up for considerationby anotherDivision Bench 3 Z of this Court in Dharmbirs case 6supral and Balrai Singhand othersVs StateofHarvanaand others 2009 29RSJ 463 In Dharmbirs case supral a Division Bench ofthis Court held as underl 2 17 A conjointreadingofboth the 64 subwruleswould show that onlythe upper age limit has been prescribed under the rules and no minimum age has been prescribedeither under sulrule 2i9 or sulule 2 ii9 which ineans that if a constable fulfills the requirementof the upper ageand the other quali8cati0nsprescribedunder the respectivecategory as pcr subule 2 there is Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 79 IcwP No 2914 of2010 13 no bar to his considerationunder each of them Meaningtherebya constable who is eligible111 one category under Rule 137 629 can also be considered in the other categoryunder Rule 13 2 i9of the PunjabPolice Rules as there isno m IX bi61rcation between the rules as far as the 0 eligibility 1S concerned with regardto the C minimum age as none ls prescribed Z CD 18 The minimum age if prescribed by wayof Z executlve instructlons would go againstthe Z interest of the Constables who are otherwise C eligibleunder the statutoryRules Rule 137 er Z iil confers a rightwhich a Constable attains on O the basis of his seniorityin the servicc CQ C when his turn comes based on the seniority a right 3 Z to consideration devolves On him This righton CL the basisofhis senioritycannot be deprivedon the basis of executive instructioils This would be Ill contravention to the statutoryrules and therefore C not sustainable 22 What emerges from the above discussions 1S that a constable who has completed5 years of servlCe on the Ist day of Januaryof the year in which the selection is made is under the age of 35 years and is eligible for considerati on and selection for includinghis name in List B of Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 80 CWP N2914 of201 0 14 Il selectedconstablesfor admissionto Lower School Course under the 55Io quotaon the basis of merit as per Rule 137 6296i ofthe PunjabPolice Rules 1934 and having in the test Bell and failed or was unable to get m enlistment due to lower merit can also claim considerationand selectionunder the 35Io quota 0 CO on the basis of senioritycumneritas per Rule CD 137 621ii if he lS eligibleunder both the Z C Z As noticed above the con tables who have attained minlmum M C 31 bench marksunder 35Io quotahave en ignoredand their juniorswere deputed to the course on the groundtha cv are more meritorlous having 08 betterbench marks This issue is in fact covered under NareshKumars CO case 6supraand came to be clarifled in Balrai Singhs cass 6supra 1m Z wherein it has been held that whererer ajunior has been deputedfor 0 CL Lower School Course ignoringthe clalm ofthe seniorsmereIyon the basis ofthe higherbench marks the senior be deputed for the course and he wilJ 17 be deemedto have passedthe course from the datehisjuniorhasqualifled 4 In such situation senior will retain his seniority 4ee There is another aspect of the matter The DGPs instructions dated 13022007 are onlyprospective in nature Prior to these instructions no bench marks were prescribedunder the statutory rules and thus all those constables who acquiredeligibilityprior to issuance of these instructlons have been denied the deputation to the Lower School Course for non achieving the rninimum bench marks It is settled law thal Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 81 CWPN02914 of2010 15 1 1 instructions cannot overrule the statutoryrules Thus these instructionscannot be pressed into service to deprivethe constablesoftheir right for for not havingachieved the minimum bench marks as prescribedunder these instructions issued later Thus such of the constables who became eligiblepriorto issuanceofthese instructions and v 0 ignoredfor not acbieving the minimum bench marks are to be deputed for 0 Lower SchoolCourse andon suscessful ofthe course theyare C to be treated senior than their juniorswho were earlier deputed to the Z C0 Lower School Course In other words theywill retalll their seniorityfor 3C beingbroughton ListB thattheywere deputed for the Z course later than their juniorsor tl did nol eve minimum bench m C marks 0C Sinlilarly such of the CI lles who are ignoredon account 08 of achievingless than the bench marksthen their JUniors are OQ alsoentitledto be deputed to the course and on completion ofthe same will 7 2 retain their seniorityover theirjliniors Qe In some of the writ petitionsthe constables have already the Lower School Course but theyhave been denied the 7 senlOnty over their juniors on the ground that the juniorsWere either havingbetterbench marks or deputedfor the course prior 111time than the e1 writ petitloners In view of the above observations these writ petitioners shall be deemed to be seniorto theirjuniorsdeputedearlier on account of better bench marks or on any other groundof eligibility To sum up these are disposedofwith the followingdirections i9 Such ofthe who have failed in 5586 merit quota Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 82 CWP N02914 of2010 6 1 are entitledto be consideredfor beingbrought on List B1 under 35Io quota on the principleof senioritycumneritprovidedtheyhave the requisite and are otherwiseeligible under the rules iil such ofthe constableswho were lessthan 35 yearsofageas on theday oftheir consideration but not more than 40 years theywill be entitledto be m 0 brought on List B1 bydeputingthemto Lower School Course 3 0 iiiJ the who acquired eligibilitypriorto theDGPs instructlons 0 dated 13022007 will be deputed for the COUrse without consideringthe Z C of minimum bench marks as prescribedunder the government C lnstructiOllS and in their cases seniorityand other eligibilitycriterla 2 under the rules will be enoll h for the dcputation to the course e tr iv9 thepetitioners who becameeligil or afterthe issuanceof 3C the instructionsdated 1302007 and achieved the minimum bench t O25 marks be deputedto the course notw nding their juniorshave better m benchmarks mn Z v interse seniorityof the constableswill be detennined on the basis of CL their seniority in their respective districtsin the and not on the basis of passingof the Lower School Course in all such cases who are ignored by the above directions However the interase seniorityof constableswill not be governedby the above directions where senior was le inored on account of pendencyof any disciplinaryproceedingsor who suffered any other disqualification for deputation to Lower School Course vi9 deputationof the shall be made on the basis of their seniorityin their respective districts and againsthe available vacancieSe Let the claim ofthe petitioners be considered in the lightofthe above directions and their deputationwhere7er required be made in Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 83 12 aP CWP No914 of2010 17 t accordancewith the above directions A copy ofthis order be placedon the record ofeach connected file eeee 11082010 6PERMODKOHLI9 BLS JUDGE m 0 Ice4 Notel Whetherto bereferredto the YES 0 W Z C5 U 1 Z Z r C 4 Z O OCt n 2 Ll Rawat Seema 2014.04.21 11: 50 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC, Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document