CWP NO. 19277 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 27.1.2009 Const.Jaspal Singh and others ...Petitioners VERSUS The State of Punjab & Others …Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: Mr.GPS Bal, Advocate for the petitioner Ms.Charu Tuli, Sr.DAG, Punjab Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) The petitioners qualified B-1 2007 test for deputation to Lower School Course in March, 2007. However, they were placed in the waiting list and were not deputed for the said course commencing on 5.4.2007. The petitioners filed this petition seeking issuance of Mandamus for a direction to allocate six more seats for Ludhiana District for the purpose of the aforesaid course, on the analogy of similar announcement/allocation of seats in other districts like Patiala, Ferozepur, Nawanshahr, Tarntaran, Muktsar, Sangrur etc. The petitioners have relied upon various communications from CWP NO. 19277 of 2007 2 the S.S.P., Ludhiana to the Deputy Inspector General of Police indicating that certain anticipated vacancies are likely to become available in the year 2008 and the seats for District Ludhiana for the said Course may be increased. In the reply filed, the respondents have denied the right and claim of the petitioners. An additional affidavit dated 29.8.2008 has been filed wherein reference is made to the details of vacancies of Head Constables. The respondents have also placed on record copy of communication dated 10.10.2007 whereby the Sr.Superintendent of Police , Ludhiana City has communicated to the concerned quarters that no vacancy in the rank of Head Constables is available. It has been argued on behalf of the respondents that before allocation of seats for the Lower School Course, the information was sought from all the Districts and the S.S.P., Ludhiana informed the authorities that no vacancy of Head Constables is available and in this view of the matter, the seats for Lower School Course were not enhanced for District Ludhiana whereas on account of availability of sufficient number of vacancies in the promotional category, the necessary orders were issued for increasing the seats for the Course in some other districts. It has also been argued that the petitioners were later on deputed in the year 2008 and have since completed the course. Under the given circumstances, the action of the respondents cannot be said to be contrary to the norms or unwarranted. The decision was taken by the competent authority for denying further allocation of seats on the basis of the fact that vacancies in the rank of Head Constables i.e. promotional category are not available in District Ludhiana. It is also not disputed that the petitioners have completed the course in the year 2008. In CWP NO. 19277 of 2007 3 view of the above, no mandamus can be issued for increase of seats and that too retrospectively. I find no merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 27.1.2009 MFK