54 1 0 2 4CWP No 2914 of2010 e 1 Jn theIIighCourt ofPunjab andHaryana at Dateof decisiol 11082010 1 CWPN2914 012010 Vs State and others 2 CVvP Nof0427 of2009 C Krishan Kumar and others Vs StateofHaryana and others 0 3 CWI No329 of2010 0 Z RajbirSinghand othersVs State and otheis C Z CWlNo1403 of2009 tt Prem Sincl 19 StateoffIarvsnaan othears Z rm C CWP No401 of2010 e 4 C C tlC Kulbir Singhand anotherVs StatcofHaryanaalldolllcrs cEj 6CWPN035360f2010 CQ KaptanSinghVs StateofIiaryana and others a7 7 CWl NoO203 of2010 Z fle lOeshR an2 olhcrs Vs StateofHaryana and others 8 CWP No147 of2010 EHC RarnMehar and othersVs StateofI Iaryanaand nlhcrs 1 1 7 9 CWP No6441 of2009 C Jai Pal and anolher Vs State ofHaryanaand otllors 10 CWPNo06l9of2009 Satyawan EliC Vs State ofHaryanaand others l l CWP No 10487of 2009 IIeadConstable Ashok Kumar Vs State ofHaryanaand olhcrs 12 CWP No 12237of2009 h Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 55 r et CWPN029140f2010 n9 e NarenderKumarConstableVs StateofHarvanaandothers 13 CWP No12248of2009 Jit SinghEHC Vs StateofHluyanaandothers 14 CWP No2253 of 2009 SubhashChanderEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others m 15CWPN016975 of2009 t 0 Krishan lImal EHC V5 StateofHoij11 alld olliers C0 16 CW Alo18430 012009 0 PannaLal EHC Vs StateofHaryana and others Z 17 CWP No18863 of2009 1 Z 1 RajKumar and anolherVs StateofHaryana and others r 18 CWP Nol8919 of2009 4 I Kamal ParkashEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others clj 19 CWP No636 of2010 Co C LadyConlstableRajbalaVs StateofHarvana and OlllelS m2 2 20 CWP No2775 of2010 ln Rishi Parshadand othersVs StateofHaryana and others 21CWPN028750f2010 1 LadyConstableSumanVs StateofHaryana andothers 22 CWP No 2968 of2010 4 SadaRam EHC Vs State ofHaryanaand others 2 CWPN03338of2010 KaptainSinghand another Vs State of Haryanaand utnero 24 CWP No 3367 of2010 EHC Mohan Lal VsStateofHaryana and others Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 56 CWPNo2914of2010 4 25 CWP N03556 of2010 HansRam and othersVs StateofHaryana andothers 26 CWP No1258 of2010 Hari KrisllanllC Vs FinaricialConlmissionor Princioal Secreldrl to GovernmentofHaryana and others 27 CWP No 4274 of2010 51 C Amar SinghEHC Vs State and others 0 28 CWP No 4749 of2010 0 I MohinderSinghEASl andanotherVs StateofHaryana and others C X 29 CWP NoA765 of2010 4r Chhaju Raln andanotherVs StateofHaryana and others Z tm 30 CWP A0960 of2010 C r RajbirSillghalld othersVs State0fHyand Iid others Z 08 31 CWP NoA963 of2010 0 Satbir SinghVs StateofHaryana and others m 32 CWP No7923 of2010 Z Ll Jaivir SinghandothersVs StateofHaryana andothers 33 CWP No 6031 of2010 Hardayal HC and othersVs StateofHaryana and others l GW COKAMl IIONBLE MR JUSTICE PERMODKOHLI Presentl Mr SC Redhu MrVikram SinghMrlI Yadav MrDinesh Malik Mrritam Saini MSurender Lamba MrRP Singh Advocatesfor the petitioners MRS Kundu Addl AGHaryanafor the respondents PERMOD KOHLI J Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 57 AW CWPN029140f2010 4 On the basisof common andidenticalissuesbothon factsand law all thesepetitions are beingdecidedbythiscommon order The entlrecontroversyrelatesto the of Rule 137 ofthe PunjabPolice Rules 1934 as applicable to the State and amendedvide PunjabPolice Iaryana Rules 2001 1 hereinafterreferred to as the Rules This rule relatesto for 0 Lower SchoolCourseand for enlisting of the eligibleofflcers in List C for their prorrl1ti0t The amendedrule Slibloct inatter of debate in the X J t5 prescntwrlt petitioiisis hundel t 137election of candidatesfor admission to Z courses at the Police TrainingCoIlcge11 ist CC B 6inForm 133 shall be maintainedby cach Z of Police It shall include the CS CQ names of all constablesselectedfor admission t e to theLower SchoolCourse to be held at the 2 CL Prlice TraljliilgCollcgc Seiectioil to the list B shaII be made lrl the monlh of Januarv U21011 4 P 1 yearand shall be limited to the numberof seats allottedto the district for the year The number C of seats in Lower School Course in a yearshall be on the basis of existingvacancies and the vacancies likely to be created within one year 1I1 the respectiveunito 55Io of the seats alfctted to a unit in the Lower School Course shall be filled in on the basis of a competitive Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 58 CWP No914 of2010 5 4mr examination 354 on the basisof seniority cumfltnessand 10Ioon thcbasisof conSlstent in Gold OT Silver Met131111All Indi Poiice oaineslill MeetINatiunltlGame6cr dipla rf m 0 braveryduringthe course of of 0 C oftlcialduty Selectionof persons agaillst50 0 seats ln listllowerschool on the basis of mertt I shall be done by a Promotioil Z Committeeon thebasisofl V C C 1 Examulation01servicesrl4 I 08 1 A cempetitiie jhereulaltercdilec tC5l r r 7 testllnl Z Clm a1Prade b Law andpracticalpolicework and 3 An Interview e 2 O All constables irrespectiveof their educational qualiticationsshall bc eligibleto appearfor B l test if theyare under the age of 35 years and have completed5 years of servlCe on 1 day of Januaryof the year 111 which selection is made However if a Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 59 1 CWP No914 of2010 e6 constable to reserved category who is recruitedafter the age of 27 yearsas per Governmentinstructionslorders then he shall be allowed to appear for minimum three consecutive chanccs acr 3 r oftlve years ofservice even ifhe 0 0 has crossed the age of 35 years llp to a I minimumof10years C I 4 iil All Constables of their 5 educationalqaliflcations shall be eligiblc C2 to I be Oll List B1 cum ment 06 basis if theyare under the age of 40 years Cn and have 5 years of service on the 7 Z first day of Januaryof the vcar in Ivhich C selectionis madc 99 The StateofHaryna issued illstructionsdated 13022007 the lllinimum ment to fulfill the criteria for 1 cumfitness relyingupon the observations of this Court in the case of 1aVe Naresh Kumar Vs State of Harvana and others CWP NoO952 of 20049decided on 051 12004 Dircctor General of Police Haryana issued these instructions prescribing minimum bench marks for selection to BI list under 350Ioquota The relevant extracl of the instructions d2ted 13022007 0Annexurel79 111 CWT N427 cf Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 60 eeV CWPN02914of2010 7 2009 is hereunder 3 In viewofthe Honble High 111the Naresh Kumar case supralit has been decidedto flx the bench marksfor Otncssundct 30 quota i tle 1 Cc assessmentof service record shoLld bc 0 on the basis of education trainingcourses A3 I passedcommendationcertiflcates and length C5 of service etc as given 111PPR 133 All 4t Z candidateswho obtain a minimum 31 marks or more would be deemed to be flt for C Cr seiectionofB 1 seats against35Io quotaon the clj bosis of illtet sc scnlority 01 the candidatesand CQ 4 for all suchcandidates inteise seiliorttv woulu 3 2 be the sole criteria for on their turn Ll under 35Io quotaln vlew of the explicitorder of HighCourt Please take further necessary f 2 action 95 The validityof these instructions has been upheldby this Courtin Hawa Singh Vs StateofHarvana and others 1WPNo1194 of2005Jdecidedon 14052008 here ale three sets 01 writ petitionsunder consideration The same are broadlycategorisedin the following manner al theeligibilityofthe candidates who appeared in 55Io merit Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 61 CWP No914 of2010 eVI quotaundcrRule 133 il to beconsideredfor unaer 3591on basis underrule 13 121Iii even if theyhavefailed under550Ioquota bl considerationof the candidateswith less than 35 yearsof age as on Ist dayof Januaryof the year in which selection is made in 35Io t r quotaof 0 C 1 lnter of the candidates on the basis of bench marks C 1t1ternlsof DGPs instructionsdated 13022007 C5 Frcnnthereadin2of Rulc 1 1 llit emeroec as followsl l3ei e 4 Z aj that 5594 o f the seats allotted to a unit in the Lolltr SchotIl Course are nleant to be fllled in on the basis of r r examlnatlon I 05 b 35010ofthe seatson the basis and 02 4r c l lOIo seats on thebasis of consistent lIl emeo Z etc CL Selection against55Io quota lS to be made b the PromotionalCommittee All thc eis irrespectile oftheir educational 1 Iesslhan 35 yearsofageatld pv 7 wno are havecompleted5 years of service on Ist dayof Januaryof the year of w selection are eligibleto appear for B1 test under merit seats of 550Io quota Similarly all the constables irrespectiveof their educationalqualificationhavingcoeted Sve years of service and lll theage of 40 years on the Ist day of Januaryof the year of selection Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 62 CWP No914 of2010 ee9 are eligibleto be brought Oll list Bel on thebasisof merit against35Ioqliota Sportspersons under 10Io quota are to bc considered subjectto eligibility ltl the above two categorles W C 1 Ilc controversyrelating to thecliglbility01 tllc candidates 0 Wllo failedto secure therequlsite mentHl the cAciniinativn C I under 55Io quota to be againconsideredunder 35Io C5 X merlt quota cameto be consideredby a Division Bench of this Court Z 111Naresh Kumars case supra9 This Division Bench judgment was before the Honble Court ltl SpecialLeave to C I AppealCivil No10409 of2005 which hasbeen dismissediil Iiminc 08 on 10051005 C il SiIniiar issue came il0 for cuiisiderationbeforethis Court ea 2 111 the cae 01 Ilaula Siilgh Vs Stalc of Harvanaand otllers v17P C No1194 of20059 decidedon 14052008 After admissionof theIvrit petitionbythe Honble Division Bench the matter was consideredbv a 1 IearnedSingleJudge of this Court for Snal disposalon 2912006 C The leamed SingleJudge ofthis Court was ofthe opinionthat certain provlslons of Rule 133 ofthe rules were not broughtto the notice of the Division Bench and on that basis a reference was made for consi Oeratton ui the wrlt petitioilana otller connccted matters by a Division Bcnch uithis Court The afresald writ petitioncame to bc heard by a Division Bench ofthis Court The Honble Division Bench Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 63 1 4 CWP No 2914 of2010 10 vide its dated 14052 008 afOrmedthe ratio in Naresh Kumarscase upra with thefollowing Otoservatlonsl 10 vieuI tIf the facts mentionedabove these writ petitionsare allowed ill the same leriiis llS in Naresh Kumars case supral he U t are directed to dcpute the 0 petitionersl 10 the flrst Lower School Course C X which will commence after the pronouncement C5 I of judgment 111 this case H0147ever The 4 Z shall bc deemedto havc qualified in m the Lower SchoolCourse lrom thc rllite whcn Lr C I other constables have quaIiedwhose naincs 08 were to ower School QO t Coursevide selectlist Annexure P l lt i illc mmo Z clear that if by getting date Of Ll passingthe Lower School Course the becameeligiblefor pronlotionthen he will get only decm22 5cnrflts withoIlt gettingany aclual tlnancial beneOts tl view uf CW principle of 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 SupremeCoun Cases 145 99 Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 64 4 CWP No2914 of20111 e11m EIonblethe Division Bench furtherconsideredthe validityof theinstructionsdated 13022007anduphelditsvaliditywith the RIllowing observationsl So far as CWP No609 of2007 is concerned in that writ petitionselect list prepared to undergo 1 Lower SchoolCourse on the basisof inslructions r 0 dated 130 2007 as referredto above has been 0 As has 5een heid earlier abovesaid C5 instructlons are perfectlyjustifiedand are ln I t consonance with the directions issued by this Z Courtin NareshKumars case ipral 99 Cr The claims of some of thc writ petitionersfor deputing tO 4 I Lower SchoolCourse have been on the ground that theyhaving olj failed in 55Io merit quotaare not entitledto be consideredfor beingbrought CQ on List B1 in 35Io quota The claimsofsome ofthe writ petitioners have emwo Z beenrejccteotor 5cingbrooglltin Ilst 1 under 3591quotaon Ulc groucd Cle thatthev were of less than 35 1ears of ae ae Ilre Istdzyof iYltl Of the year of selection In some cases the claims have been for non 1 the minimum 31 bench marksin terms of the DGPs instructions dated13 022007 In Naresh Kumars case Ipral the Honble Division W Bench ruled the eligibilityofthe constables for their consideration both in 55010and 35010quota This judgmenthas attained finality The SLP has also been dismissed by the Honble SupremeCourt The ratio of the said judg has been reitcrated in Hawa SingWscases 4supral as alw in Corlstable Vs State of Harvana and others 2009 11 RSJ 3 10 wherelntne fclllowing observationshave been madew Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 65 15 CWP N02914 of2010 12 4e98 13 So there are threedistinct with their own and for eligibilityfor consideration Therc lS no bar to rll a cotisrabiein anv if he fulfllls lhecligibiliiyilerla 4 ifhc iS Cllgiblc ar61e Ill e r all three he has a statutoryrightto 0 considerationin all three Thc Rules C do not or requiresomc inlniinum age Z C5 for eligibilityunderany ofthe What it C specifies is the upper agelimit for consideration Z r undera category w C Deoite these instructions certalri i501 1l mrC9r01 tn Cr 4 hereinabovehave agaillcroppedup Tbe conlroversy relirdirlgthe c2j eligibility of candidatesunder 35 yearsof agefor beingbrought on List 131 OO for 3596quota againcameup for considerationbyanother Di1ision Bench WA Z of this Court in Dharmbirs case supraland Balrai Singhand othersVs Clu State ofHaryanaand others2009 2JRSJ 463 In Dharmbirs case supral a Division Bench ofthis Court held as under 2 17 A conjointreadingof both the sulniles would shl1wthat onlythe upper age liinit hai been prescribed under the nlles and no ininimum age has bcen prescribedelther Ulluul subule 2 il or subule 2 iil which means that if a constable fulfills therequirement of the upper age and the other qualificationsprescribedunder the respectivecategory as per subrule 2 there is Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 66 4 CWPN029140f2010 m13 110 bar to his oorisiderationuder 1 of theni eatt Nleaning thereby a constable who is eligiblein one categoryunderRule 137 621 can also be considered in the other categoryundcr Rule 13 7 21 6iilof the PunjabPolice Rules as thereis no m C bi6lrcation between the rules as far as the 0 eligibility 1S concerned with regardto the C0 minimum age as none is Z CD l S The niliilnlum age it bv wav of V Y t r3XCCU11Ve lIl5CrUCt1OllS wouid gu againstllic Z interest of the Constables who are otherwise eIigible underthestatutoryRules Rule 137 Ct m iil confers a rightwhich a Constable attaiils on c8 the basis of his seniority in the service As and CD when his turn comes based on the senioritv a right mmo Z to considerationdevolveson him This righton Cle the basisofhis seniority cannol cs u 11 u t ele basisof executive irtstroctioils This would be n I contravention to the statutoryrules and therefore C not sustainable 22 What emerges from the above discussicIns 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 01 35 yearsand is eligible for consideration and selcction i0r including his name in List Bel 01 Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 67 1 e CWPNo2914of2010 14 selectedconstablesfor admissionto Lower School Courseunder the 550Ioquotaon the basis of inerit as per Rule 137 211I ofthe PunjabPolice Rules 1934 and having lll the test lBll and failed or w lc 10 4 1 eniistnlent dlie lil lowcr mcrit can also claun C consideration and selectionunderthe 3596quota 0 C on the basis of as per Rule Z 0 137 621iil if he IS eligibleunder both the Z categones 99 Z As noticed above the constableswho have attained mlnlmum m C 31 bench marksunder 35Io quotahavebeen ignored and were deputed to the course on the Oroundthat theyare more mentorious having 05 betterbench marks 1111515Sce iS Ill fact covered under Narcsh KumaS Cll Cr case fSliFlraland came to be clarified in Halrai Singhs cass sunra a7 Z wherein it has been held that whererer a junior has been dcputedfor Ll Lower School Course ignoringthe claim ofthe seniorsmerelyon the basis of thehigherbench marks the senior be deputed for the course and he will 17 be deemedto have passedthe course from the datehis juniorhasqualiOed 4e In such situation senior will retain his seniority 4eea There is another aspect of the matter The DGPs instructions dated 13022007 are only prospectiveln nalure Prlor u th lnalrul r no bench marks were prescribedunder thc slMutoni rules an4l tllus 11 those constables who acquiredeligibility prior to issuance of these instructions have been denied the deputationto the Lower School Course for non achieving the rninimum bench marks It is settled law thal Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 68 1 CWPN02914 of2010 15 instructionscannot ovelrulethe statutorv rules Fhus these instructionscanrlot be into serviceto dcprive thc constahlesoftheir rightfur for not havingachievedthe mmum benchnlarksdS under these instructionsissued later Thus such of the constableswho becameeligiblepriorto issuanceoftheseinstructionsand m Lr ignoredfor not the nununum benchmarks are to be dcputedfor 0 Lower SchoolCourse andon successful ofthe course theyare 0 to be treated senior than their juniorswho were earlier deputed to the Z C5 Lower SchoolCourse In otherwords theywill retain their for X 4tt beine brought oti Llst Bwl thnt theylNere depulcdfoi le 2 r course later than their iuniirs or thc did not ochicvemilliioOl bench C marks e I Similarlysuch ofthe constableswho are ignored on account 08 of achicvinglessthan the prescribed benchmarks thentheirjuniors are C2 et alsoentitledto be to the course and on completion ofthe same IvllI 3 Z retaintheir seniority over theirjuniors C In some of the writ petitionsthe constables have already the Lower SchooI Course but theyherle been dellied the 7 their juniors the ground that the juniors sentono over 00 lvcre eithcr havingbetter bench marks or deputedfor the course prior in time than the a0 writ petitioners In view of the above observationsthese writ petitioners shall be deerned to be scnior to their juniorsdeputedearlier on account of better bench marks or on any othcr groundof eligibility To sum up these petitions are disposedofwith the followingdirectionsl i Such ofthe who have failed in 55010merit quota Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 69 1 JCWPN02914 of2010 16 are entitledto beconsideredfor beingbrought on List Bm1under35Ioquota on the principle of providedtheyhave the requisite andare otherwiseeligible under therules iil such ofthe constableswho were lessthan 35 yearsofageas on theday oftheir consideration but not more than 40 years theywill be entitledto be 1r brought on List B1 by themto Lower Scho rle U 0 iiil the who ellgibiiity rlriorto tbe DGPs structions 0 dated 13022007 will be for the course without consideringthe t5 questionof minimum bench marks as under lhe government I 4t instructions and in their cases seniorityand other eligibility criteria Z underthe rules will be enough for their to the course r ivl thepetitioners who becameeligiblefor after the issuanceof the instructionsdated13022007 and have achievedthe minimumbench 05 marks be deputedto the course their juniorshave better bencll illarks Wo Z vl iiltet 5c si niorlt ot the constableswiil be detennined un thc basls V 1 Ll their seniority in their districtsin the and nclt on the basis of passingof the Lower School Course in all such cases who are 1 ignored by the above directions However the intereseseniorityof constableswill not be govemedby the above directions where senior was G ignoredon account of pendencyof any disciplinaryproceedings or who suffered any other disqualificationfor deputationto Lower School Course vio deputatlonof the petitionersshall be maJe 1tr o i o of their VbA seniorityin rheir respective districts snd againstlhe available vatncies Let the claim ofthe petitioners be considered in the lightofthe above directions and their deputationwherevever required be made in Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 70 CWP No2914 of2010 7 accordancewiththeabovedirections A copy ofthis orderbe placed on the record ofeach connected 14llle rm 1 a 4e 11082010 PERMOD KOHLII BLS JUDGE 1 C t Note Whether to bereferredto the YES 0 C a C5 r ese6 Z 0 yL Cr C7 rm C 4t Z c8 11 U7 Z tl Parkash Om 2014.05.02 14: 26 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document