76 4 I6 CWP No914 of2010 Jn theIlighCourt ofPunlabandHaryanaat Chandigarll Dateofdecisionl l l 08201 0 1CWPN029140f2010 P VirenderSingll Vs State and others 2 CWP Noo427 of2009 L KrishanKumar and othcrs Vs StateofHaryana and othcrs 0 3 CWP No329 of2010 Ca 7 RajbirSinghandothersVs StateofllaryanaJnd othcrs A3 4 CWP No1403 of2009 r Prcin Singh VsStatcof Harvanaanclothlrs V 4 4 5 CWP N3401 of2010 5 Pd 4 ItlC Kulbir Singhand anolher Vs StatcoHaryailaaild otllcis 6 CWP No536 012010 m5 Yl KaptanSinghVs StateofJ laryanaand others 4 3 7 CWPNo7203 012010 1 DeshRajand otllersVs Stateof Haryanaand othcrs 1 8 CWPNo8147 of2010 EHC RaJnMehar and othersVstate ofHaryana and othcrs 9 CWP No 6443 of2009 Jai Pal and anotllex Vs Stateof Haryanaatld olllors 10 CWP No 6619 of2009 EHC 1s State0f14aryana and olhers 11 CWP No 10487 020 Ielead Constable Ashok Kumar Vs StateofHaiyanaand olhcrs 1 CWPN017237002009 e Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 77 S CWPN29140f2010 2 NarenderKumar ConstableVs StateofHarvanaandothers 13 CWP No12248 of2009 Jit SinghEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others 14 CWP No12253 of2009 SubhashChanderEHC V State andothers 15 CWP No6975 of2009 W W V e 1 KrishanKumar EHC Vs StateofHaryana and others 3 3 16 CWP No 18430of2009 9 PannaLal EllC Vs StateofHalyanaand others 1 17 CWP No 18863of2009 0 pv RajKumar and anotherVs StateofHaryana and others m e0 18 CWP No18919 of2009 V 1 Kamal ParkashEHC Vs Sta1eofHaryana and others S 19 CWP No636 of201 0 Yl V LadyConstableRajbalaVs StateofHaryana and others J 2V 20 CWP No775 of2010 Rshi ParshadandothersVs StateofHaryana and others 21 CWP No 2875 of20 0 LadyConstableSuinanVs State0fl4atyana and otllers 22 CWP No 2968 of2010 SadaRam EHC Vs Statc ofHaryanaancl others 23 CWP No4338 of2010 KaptainSinghand anothcr Vs State ofHaryanaand others 24 CWP N03367 of2010 EFlC Mohan Lal Vs State ofHaryanaand others Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 78 7 44 1 4 CWPN02914 of201 0 25 CWP N03556 of2010 1lons Ranl and othersVs Stateof llaryanaand others 26 CWP NoA258of2010 HariKrishan HC Vs Financial Cominissioner86PrincipalSecreta ttl GovernmentofHaryanaand others 27 CWP NoA274 of2010 0 EHC VsStateofHaryana and others 23 0 28 CWP NoA749 of2010 C C MohinderSinghEASI andanotherVs StateofHaryana andothers C5 29 CWP NoA765 of2010 Rain and anotherVs State and othcrs Z m 30 CWPN049600f2010 0 et RajbirSinghand othersVs StateofHaryana and others 31 CWP No 4963 of2010 05 CQ SatbirSinghVs StateofHaryana andothers et 7 32 CWP No 7923of2010 Z Clw JaivirSinghand othersVs StateofHaryana andothers 33 CWP No6031 of2010 1 HC and othersVs StateofHaryanaandothers t C CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE PERMOD KOHll Presentl Mr SK Redhu MrVikram Singh Mrl Yadav Mr0incsh Malik Mrlritam Saini Mrurender lamba MiRP SinghAdvocatesfor the petitioners MrS Kundu Addl AG Haryanaforthe respondents PERMOD KOJiLl J 0 Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 79 A CWPN09140f2010 4 On the basisof coinmon and identicalissuesbcIlllOll factsand Iaw all thesepetitions are beingdecidedbytllis comlnon order The eillire coontroversy relates to the of Rule 137ofthePunoPolice and amendedvide PunjabPolice Iaryana Rules 2001 m Q hereinafterreferredto as the Rulesl This rule relatcsto for 0 Lower SchoolCourseand for enlistingof the eJigible omcers in List 1 for their promotionThe amendedrule subjectma1tcrof dcbate111the S a3 present writ petitions is hereunderl 1 37mSelectionof candidatesfor adnlission 10 e coursesat the PoliceTrainingCollegell List 9 Pe B in Form 133l shall beamtaed by each 0 9 r of Police Il shall includethe Il names of all constablesselected for admisson e 7 to the Lower School Course to be Ileld at the S 71 Police TrainingCollegeSelection to thelisl 13 shall be made lll the month of Januaryeach yearand shall be limited to the nuillbel 01 seats allottedto the district for theyear 1he numbcr eee of seats in Lower School Course in a year shall be on the basis of existingvacancies and the vacancies likely to be created within one year Ill the respectiveUlllt 50 of the seats aJlottedto a unit in the Lower School Course shallbe filled in on the basis of a colnpetilive Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 80 b e CWP N02914 of2010 5 examination 35Io on thc basis of seniority cumfitness and 10Ioon thc basisof consistent in Gold or Silver Medal in All India Police MetINational Gamesor displayof m Cr duringlhe course of of 0 C offlcial duty Selectionof persons against50 I scats Ill Iistllower school on the basis of merit C C shall be done by a Proinotioll Cr Z Comlnitteeon the basisofl 1 2 C Ct 1 Exatninationofservices and I 08 2 A test Ihereinaflcr called 1 OO testl1111 m Z l1 a Prade bl Law and practical policework and 3An Interview C 2 i9 All constables irrespectivcof their cducational qualifications shall bc eligibleto appearfor B1 test if theyare under the age of 35 years and have completed 5 years of service on 1 day of Januaryof the year 111 which selection is made IIowever if a Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 81 0 1 Pl CWP No2914 of2010 e constable to reserved category who is recruitedafter the age of 27 yearsas per Governinent instructloilslorders then he shall be allowed to appcar for rniniinuin three consecutive chances afler m C of five yearsofservicc cven lfhe 0 C has crossed the age of 35 years up to a I of 10years C5 I Z iil Ali Constables of their C educational shall bc cJigibleto Lr e4C I be broughtOll List Bml seniority CUm 111etelt 08 basis if theyare under the age of 40 years CQ and have 5 years of serviceon the 7 Z first dayof Januaryof the ycarin which selectionls made 53 The Stateof Haryanaissuedinstructionsdaled 13022007 7 the mlllllllUln merit to fulfill tlle criteoriafor seniorY Cumfitness relyingupon the observations of this Court in the case of C Natesh Kumar Vs State of Harvana and others CWP No952 of 20041decided on 051 12004 DirectoorGenelral of Police Haryatla issued these instructions prescribingminimum bcnch marks 01 selection to BI Iist under35Io quota Thc relevant extract of tlle dated 13022007 6AnnexureI in CWP No6427 of Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 82 r 1 bb a CWP N2914 of2010 7 2009 is hereunderl 3 Iil view ofthe Honble High ln the Naresh Kumar case 6supralit has been decidedto ftx the bench marksfor fltnessunder 350Io quota The m Q assessmentof service record should be made 0 1L1 Oll the basis of education trainingcourscs 2C passedcommendationcertificates and Iength C5 of serviceetc as given PPR 1 7 All the r Z candidates who obtain a mitllmuln 31 marks 2 or nlore would be deelned to bc fit for Lr er selection ofBl on the rA5 basisof intermseseniorityof Ihe candidiitesHlld CO er for all such candidates interse senioritv would 7 Z be thc sole criteria for deputingon their turn 0 under 35Io quota111VlCW of the explicitorder of HighCourt Please take funher necessary 17 1 actIOll 93 The validityof these instructions has been uphcldby this Courtin Hawa Singh Vs State ofHarvana and others CWP No1194 of20051decided on 14052008 There are three sets of writ petitionsunder consideration The sanle are broadlycategoriscdiil the following mannerl a9 the eligibilityofthe candidates who appeared in 55Io merit Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 83 P4 11 CWP N2914 of2010 4 quotaunderRule 137 i to be consideredIorpromotioil under35Io on basis undcr rule 13 621 I eveil if theyhavefailed under55Ioquota b1 considerationof the candidateswith Iessthan 35 yearsofageas on lst dayof Januaryof toheyear ill which selection is inade in 35Io m 0 Cluotaof 0 C 1 interse seniority of llhecandidates Oll the basis of bench nlarks 0 I lll tennsof DGPs instructioils dated 13022007 C5 I From thereading ofRule 13 6ll it emergesas followsl 4t Z a1 that 55Io of the seats allotted to a unit lll the Lowcr Schoul Course are meant to be Olled ltl on the basis of C r examinatioll Oll bl 35Ioofthe seats on thebasis aild c9 10Io seats on the basis ofconsistent Ill W2 Z etc llm Selection against550Ioquota lS to be nlade by the Promotional Cominittee All the coilstablcs irrespective oftheir educational who are Iesstllan 35 years of ageand have completed5 years of service on Ist day of Januaryof the year of C selection are eligibleto appear for Bel test under merit seats of 55Io quota Similarly al 1 the constables irrespecti ve of their educationEl qualificationhavingcompletedflve years of service and lll the age of 40 years on the lst day of Januaryof the yearof selection Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 84 Aa P CWPN2914 012010 e9 are eligibleto be brought on Iist on the basis of meritagainst 35Io quota Sportspersons under 100Ioquota are to be considered subiectto eligibility 111 the above I wo categones r 1f The controversyrelating to the eligibilityof the candidates 3 0 who failed to secure therequisite merit lll the examinatlOll C r under 55Io quota to be agalll considered under 35Io seniority 0 I merit quota calne to be consideredbya Division Bench of this Court C Z lll Naresh Kunlars case suroralThis Division Bench was before the Honble Court in SpccialLeave to L et AppealCivi No10409 of2005 which hasbeen dismisscd in limine I 08 on 10052005 4 A similar issue cane up for considerationbefore11IlisCourt 5 Z 111 the case of Hawa Singh Vs Stateof Harvanaand others 6CWP r No1194 of20051decidedon 14052008 After admissionofthe writ petitionbythe Honble Division Bench the matter was consideredbya 1 learnedSingleJudgeof this Court for Onal disposaltlll 29 112006 1 Thelearned SingleJudgeofthisCourtwasofthe opinionthat certain C provisionsof Rule 13 ofthe rules were not broughttotlle notice of the Division Bench and Oll hat basis a reference was made for consideration of the writ petitionand other connected rnauers bv a Division Bench of this Court The aforesaid writ petitioncame to be heard by a Division Bench ofthis Court The Honble IOivision Bench Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 85 a P CWPNo914 of2010 10 voideits dated 14052008 afOrmedthe ratlo in Naresh Kumarscase supralwith thefollowing observationsl In view of thc facts tneiltioned above these Writ petltions are allowed lll the saine terms as lll Naresll Kumars case supral The 1 Ct are direcled lo deputethe 0 petitioncitsl to the first Lower School Course C I which will commence after the pronoullcemenl C1 I of in this case Iiowever The Z shallbe deemedto havequalified lll 5r a2 the Lower School Course fronl the date when C I other constables have qualied whose nallles a5 were approved to Lower School CO e Coursevide sclect list Annexure I1 It is made 2 Z clear that if by geuing date uf CL passingthe Lower School Course the becameeligiblefor then he will get only deemed benelts withoul 1 gettingany actual financial beneflts in view 01 C principleof no work no pay9 as laid down by their Lordships of the Honblc SupremeCourt ln Ullion of India and another vs Tarsem lal and others 2006910 SupremeCoun Cascs 145 ll Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 86 1 d r CWP Nol914 of2010 11e Honble the Division Bench furtherconsideredthe validityof the instructionsdated 13022007 and upheldits validitywith the following observationsl So far as CWP No3609 of 2007 is concerned Ill that writ petitionselect list prepared to 1 Lowcr School Course on the basisof iinslrUCtlOtlS 23 0 dated 1 022007 as referred to above has been 0 As hasbeen held earlier above said C5 instructoiOllS are perfectlyjustifledand are lll X consonance with the directions lssued by lhis Z 1 Court in NareshKumars case 6supral C The claims of some of tlle writ for deputing to e J2 Lower School Course have been rejected on the groundthatheyhaving 08 failed in 55Io merit quotaare not entitledto bc considcredfor beingbrought 10 on List B1 in 350Ioquota The claiins ofsome ofthe writ have 7 Z been rcjectedfor beingbrought in List Bml under 35Io quota on the ground that theywere of Iessthan 35 years of age as on lst dayof Januaryofthe yearof selection ln some cases the claims have been rejectedfor non 1 achievingthe ininiinum 31 bench marksin terms ofthc DGPs instructions dated 13007 In Naresh Kumars case 6supralthe Honble Division Wd Bench ruled the eligibility ofthe constables for their consideration both in 55Io and 35Io quota This judgmenthas anained Onality The SLP has aJso bcen dismissed by the HOonble Supreme Court The ratio of the said judgmenthas been reiterated ltl Hawa SingWscases supral as also in ConstableDharmbir Vs Stale of Harvana and others 2009 1 RSJ 310 whereinthe followingobservations have been mad Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 87 41i0 1 ll CWPN09140f2010 12 13 So thereare threedistinct with tlleir own and 10r eligibilityfor consideration There is no bar to considerationof a constable in anv calcgory if he fulfllls theeligibility crltena ifhe is eligible Ill W L alI thrce he has a statutoryrightto 0 coilsidcrationin all three categori es The Rules 4 do not categorize or requiresome minitnum age I 0 for eligibility under any ofthe What it 1I 14 1S the upper age Iimit for consideration Z 1 undera category 0 Despitcthese mstructions certaln issues referred to r I hereinabove have againcroppedup The controversyregardingthe 08 eligibilyofcandidates under35 yearsofagefor beingbrought on List 131 QO IC for 35Io quota agaiilcame up 0orconsiderationbyanother19ilision Bench lm Z 0 of this Court in Dharinbirscase 6supral and Balrai Singhand others Vs 0 State ofHarvanaand others 2009 2l RSJ 463 In Dharmbirs case lsuloral a Division Bench ofthis Courtheldas under r7 17 A conjointreadingofboth the subaruleswould show that onlythe upper age Iinlit 4e has been prescribed under the rules and 110 min imum age has been prescribcdeitller under subwrule26i9 or suberule 2 ii9 which means thal if a constable fulfllls the requirement of tlle upper ageand the other qualillcationsprescribed under lhe respectivecategory as per sutlle 2 there JS Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 88 P CWP N02914 of2010 13m 110 bar to hs considerationunder each of them Meaningthereby a constable who is eJigible lll onc category undcr Rule 117 can also be considered in the other categoryundcr Rule 13 21 iil ofthe PunjabPolice Rules as there is no 1 biAlrcationbetween the rules as far as the 0 eligibilltylS concerned with regilrdto the C0 Illllllmuin age as nonc is prescribed X C0 18 The minitnum age if by way of C execultve instructions would go against the Z 5C 1nterest of the Constables who are otherwise m 0 eligibleunder the statutoryRules Rule 13 121 r I io confers a rightwhich a Constable attains Otl 08 the basis of his seniorityin the service As and CO when his turn comes basedOtl the senioritv a right mvao Z 0 to consideration devolves on him lhi s rightOll CL the basisofhis seniority cannot be deprived on thc basis of executive instructions This would be Jll 1 contravention to the statutoryrules and therefore C not sustainable 2 Whatemergcsfrom thc above dlscusslons Is that a constablc who has completed 5 years 01 servlce on the Ist day of January0f the year lll which the selection is made is under the age of 35 years and is eligible for considerati on and selection for including his name in List Bl 01 Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 89 CWPNo914 of2010 14 selcctedconstablesfot admissionto Lower School Courseunderthe 55Io quotaon thc basis of inerit asper Rule 137 il ofthe PuniabPolice Rules 1934 and having in the test 6Bm l l and failed or was unable lo get a cnlistment due to Iower mcril can also claim C consideralion and selectionunder the 3596quota 0 C Oll the basis of as per Rule 3C C 137 6216iil if he is eligibleunder both the I e Z As noticed above the constableswho have attained ITllnllnulll 0 3 1 bench marksundcr 35 quotahavebeen ignoredand thcir juniorswere Cr I to the COUrSC Oll thegroundthattheyare more meritorlOUShaving 08 betterbench ma11csThis issue is in fact coveteedunder Narcsh Kuillais CO r case supral and came to be clarified in Balrai Singhscass supral 7 Z wherein it has been hcld that whereever a junlor has been deputedfor QW Lower School Course ignoring the claiin ofthe seniors tnerely on the basis ofthe higherbench tnarks the senior be deputed for the course and he will 17 be deemedto have passed the course froin the datehis juniorhasqualiOed 4 In such situation scnior will retain his seniority 4ma There is another aspect of the matter The DGPs instructions dated 13022007 are onlyprospective in nature Prior to these instructions 110 bench Inarks were prescribedundcr the statutory rules and thus all 44464nS ISM4114144181w t41114 a14MlllPaeA eIllw11411 01PlmP 6m 18H41M19 tSlf 0blSm0 lnstructions havc been denied the deputation to the Lower School Course for non achicving the Ininimum bench marks lt is settled Iaw thal Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 90 1 CWPN029140f2010 15 inslructions cannot overrulethe statutoryrules Thus thesc instructionscannot be in10serviceto deprive theconslablesoftheir rightfor for not havlllgachievedthe minlmunlbencllinarks as under these lllStrlICtlOilS issucd later Thus such of the constables who becaIne eligiblepriorto issuanceof theselllstructions and Q ignored for not themlllllnum benchmarksare to be for 0 Lowet SchoolCourse andon successful ofthe course theyare C0 to be treated senior than their juniorswho were earlicr dcputedl0 the I C0 Lower School Course ln other words theywill retain their senlorityfot e beingbrought on List Be1 that theywere deputedforthe Z course Iater than their juniorsor theydid not hievelniniinum bench C mark e 1 Similarlysuch of the constableswho are ignoredon account 08 CQ of Jessthan the bench marks then theit juniorsare r also entitledto be depuled to the course and on coinpletion ol the same vvill 7 Z 0 retaintheir seniority over their juniors t1 In some of tlle writ petitionsthe constables have already the Lowcr School Course but theyhave been denied the 1 7 senlorltyOVer tlleir junlolSon the ground that the juniorsWere eithcr havingbetterbench marksor deputed for the course prior Ill time than the C writ petitioners In view of the above observations these writ petitionersshall be deemed to be senior to their juniorsdeputedearlier on account of better bench marks or on any other ground of eligibility To Suln up these petitionsare disposedofwith the followingdirectionsl i Such ofthc who have failed in 55Io nlerlt qtiota Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 91 CWPN029140f2010 e 1 areentitledto be consideredfor beingbrought on List Bel under 350Ioquota on the of providedtheyhavcthe requisite andare otherwiseeligible undertherules iil suchofthe constableswho were lessthan 35 yearsofagcas on theday oftheir considerationbut not more than40 years theywill be entitledto be 1 on List Bl by themto Lower SchoolCourse r 9 3 0 iiil the whoacquiredeligibilitypriorto the DGPs 1nstruCtlOll S C dated13022007 will be for the course without consideringthe I 0 of minimum bench marks as prescribedunder the government lnstructlOllS and in their cases seniorityand other eiigibility critena Z under the rules will beenough for their to the coursc 2 rl ivl thepetitioners wIlo becameeligiblefor afler the issuanceof I the instructionsdated 13022007 and have achieved the minimurn bench 08 marks be to the course better benchmarks 2 Z 3 v intervseseniority of the constableswill be deterinined on the basisof CL theirseniority in their respective districtsin the and not on the basisof passingof the Lower School Course in all such cases who are 1 ignored by the abovc directions However the interse seluorityof constableswil 1not be governedby the above directions where senior was 4m inored on account of pendencyof any disciplinary proccedingsor who sufferedany other disqualiflcation for deputation to Lower School Course vi of the petitionersshall be lnade on the basis of tllcir seniority in their respective districts and againstthe available vacancies Let the claim ofthe petitioners be considcred in the Iightofthe above directionsand their dcputationwhereever required be tnade i n Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 92 CWP No914 of2010 17 6 1 accordancewith theabovedirections A copy ofthis oorderbeplaced on the record ofcach connecled file V1 4 ll082010 6PERMODK014LI9 BLS JUDGE 1 C 1L 0 Notel Whetherto berefciTcdto the YES t43 I 9 t X 11 Z ct C 2C 08 0 Z 2 0a Uma 2014.04.09 13: 19 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document