IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.17884 of 2010 Date of Decision : October 01, 2010. President's Police Gallantry Awardee's Association of India and others .....Petitioners versus The State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Ms.Deepali Puri, Advocate, for the petitioners. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioners seek quashing of the Scheme (Annexure P-1) inviting applications for allotment of 4000 free hold residential plots in Aerocity, S.A.S.Nagar, Mohali, on preferential basis in terms of the brochure opened on 7th June, 2010 and closed on 6th July, 2010. It may be mentioned at the outset that the petitioners' claim pertains to reservation of 2% plots for the Gallantry Award Winners from the defence services and paramilitary forces and Punjab Police Personnel awarded with President Police Medal or Gallantry and/or Police Medals for Gallantry. C.W.P.No .17884 of 2010 2 In sum and substance, the petitioners' grievance is that no order of preference ought to have been provided in the brochure and all the eligible candidates irrespective of their sub-category ought to have been put together in the draw of lots. In order to appreciate the contention, it would be apposite to reproduce Clause (x) of the brochure (Annexure P-1) which reads as follows:- x) In the case of Gallantry Award Winners:- a) The Gallantry award winners from the defence services, paramilitary forces who have distinguished themselves by acts of bravery and valour in the defence of our country, both in war and peace time and Punjab Police Personnel awarded with President Police Medals for Gallantry and Police Medals for Gallantry. They should not already have received any such discretionary quota plot/house/flat from any other scheme in any part of the Country. b) In case of posthumous award, the widow (if there is only one) shall be considered the next of kin eligible to avail this quota. In case the awardee was unmarried, the mother or father in that order. c) The following order of preference will be adopted:- (i) Param Vir Chakra; (ii) Maha Vir Chakra; (iii) Vir Chakra; (iv) Ashoka Chakra; (v) Kirti Chakra; (vi) Shaurya Chakra; (vii) President Police Medals for Gallantry; (viii) Police Medals for Gallantry and (ix) Sena Medal/Nau Sena Medal/ Vayu Sena Medal........” C.W.P.No .17884 of 2010 3 The petitioners contention is that no distinction could be drawn between a Param Vir Chakra Awardee and the Sena Medal awardee and all of them ought to be mixed up for the purposes of draw of lots. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length, I do not find any substance in the above noticed contention for more than one reasons. Firstly, the petitioners are estopped by their act and conduct from questioning the criteria laid down in the brochure at this belated stage when the draw of lots has also been held. It was explicitly stipulated in the brochure that “the following order of preference will be adopted” and the petitioners were fully aware thereof. They do not come forward to impugn the said order of preference at an appropriate stage rather allowed the grass to grow under their feet. Otherwise also, per se, there is nothing illegal with the order of preference given in the brochure. The Gallantry Awards are based upon the nature of the bravery exhibited by the awardee and the Param Vir Chakra awardee should undoubtedly deserves preference over Shaurya Chakra or police medal awardee. Both of them constitute two different and distinct class and no writ to treat the unequals as equals can be issued. Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioners points out that the President of India has issued an order of protocol in November, 1998 (Annexure P-2) in terms whereof an Ashoka Chakra Awardee has a preference over the awardees of Maha Vir Chakra/Kirti Chakra etc. However, the impugned clause of the brochure (Annexure P-1) runs contrary to the said order of preference. C.W.P.No .17884 of 2010 4 In my considered view, this Court need not to go into the aforesaid question for the reason that none of the petitioners is Ashok Chakra Awardee nor any Maha Vir Chakra/Kirti Chakra/Vir Chakra has been awarded to them. Suffice it to say that if there is any such mistake in the broacher, it is curable at the hands of the respondent-authorities. For the reasons aforestated, I do not find any merit in this writ petition which is dismissed. October 01, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE