78 471 CWP No2914 of2010 1 In thclIighCourt ofPunjab and Haiyana ot Cl1andiarh Date ofdecisionll l 082010 1CWPN029140f2010 P Vs StateofHaryana and others 2 CWP No6427 of2009 5 Krishan Kumar and others Vs StateofHaryana and othcrs 0 3 CWP N03329 of2010 CO I RajbirSingb and 015ersVs StateofIryanaan8olel5 C0 4 CWP No 403 of2009 Prem Singh Vs StateofHarvanaand others Z 4 5CWPNo3401of2010 r IHC Kulbir Singhand anotherVs Stateof Haryana aild otllers a5 6 CWP No 7536 of2010 ao KaptanSinghVs State ofHaryanaand others r m 7 CWP N07203 of2010 Z ll lOeshRajand otllers Vs StaleofHaryanaand oihers 8 CWl No147 of2010 EHC Rain Mehar and othersVs StateofHaryanaand others e 9 CWP No 6443 of2009 C Jai Pal and another Vs StateofHaryanaand otllcrs 10 CWPN066190f2009 Satyawan EHC Vs State ofHaryanaand others 11CWPNo104870f2009 Head Constable Ashok Kumar Vs StateofHaryanaand othcrs 12 CWP No12237 of2009 Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 79 r 1 e CUTPN029140f2010 02 NarenderKumar ConstableVs StateofHaryana and others 13 CWP No 12248of2009 Jit SinghEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others 14 CWP No 12253of2009 SubhasbCllandel EHC vS StateofliarIana and others m C 15 CWP No 6975of2009 0 Krishan Kumar EHC Vs StateofHaryana and others C3 16 CWP N0184300f2009 C5 PannaLal EHC Vs StateofHaryana and others I 17 CWP No18863 of2009 Z RajKumar and anotherVs StateofHaryana and others 2 18CWPNo18919of2009 t Kamal Parkas5EHC Vs StateofHaryana and others c 19 CWP No636 of2010 rn LadyConstableRajbalaVs StateofHaryana and others 7 Z 20 CWP No 2775 of2010 C Rishi Parshadand othersVs StateofHaryana and others 21 CWPNo2875of2010 LadyConstable SuinanVs StateofHaryana and others 22 CWP No 2968 of2010 IV Sada Ram EHC Vs State ofHaryanaand others 23CWP Nn33380f2010 KaptainSinghand another Vs State ofHaryanaand others 24CWPNo367of2010 EHC Mohan Lal Vs State ofHaryanaand others Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 80 IJI r CUTPN0 2914 of2010 3556of2010 25CWP No3556 HansRanl alodothersVs StateofHlirvanaaild olhers 26 CWP N042580f2010 Hari Krishan HC Vs Financial Commissionerc PrincipalSecretaly to GovernmentofHaryana and others 27 CWP NoA274 of2010 C Amar SinghEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others 0 28 CWP NoA749 of2010 C3 Z Mohinder SinghEASI and anotherVs StateofHaryana and others e C0 Z 29CWPN0765of2010 Z ChhajuRaln aridanotherVs StateofHaryanaand others r 30 CWP No 4960 of2010 tr RajbirSinghand othersVs StatofHaryana and others C45 31CWPN049630f2010 0 SatbirSinghVs StateofHaryana andothers 7 32 CWP N07923 of2010 Z 0 Jaivir Singhand othersVs StateofHaryana andothers 33CWP N060310f2010 Il HC aild othersVs StateofHaryanaand others Ce CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE PERMOD KOF Presentl VeKe RihU Mrikram Singh MrsJ yadav MrDesh Malik MrPritam Saini MrSurender Lamba AllrRP Singh Advocatesfor the petitioners MrRS Kundu Addl AG Haryanaforthe respondents PERMOD KOHLI J Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 81 5 e CWP No914 of2010 4 On thebasisof common andidenticalissuesboth Oll factsand law all thesepetitions are beingdecidedbythis common order llle entire controversyrelatesto the of Rule 133 ofthe PunjabPolice Rules 1934 as applicable to theStateofHaryana and amendedvide Punjab Police Amendment Rules 2001 1 C hereinaer lerred llC 2S the Rules9 ThiS ille relatesto for 0 Lower School Course ana for enlistingof the eligibic offlcers in List l I C for their promotion The amendedrule subjectmatter of debate in the I C presentwrit petitionsis reproduced hereunderl I 1 37Selection of candidatesfor admissionto Z courses at the Police Training List 0 B GnForm 1331 shall be maintainedby each 08 of Police It shall include the Cl2 nalnes of all conslablesselected tor admissioii V Z to the Lower School Course to be held at tne Clm Police TrainingCoilegeSelectionto the list B shall be made lll the month of Januaryeach 1 yearand shall be limited to the nuinber of seats allottedto the district for theyear The number Cn of seats in Lower School Course ln a year shall be on the basis of existingvacancies and the vocancies likely to Oe created within one year 11 the respectiveunite 5596 of the seats allotted to a unit in the Lower School Course shall be filled in on the basis of a competitive Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 82 1 r CWPN02914of2010 5 examlnatloll 30 on the basis of senior cummfitnessand 1096on the basisul conSlSteilt OutstalldlnOperlOllllllnCe 1T1 Gold or SiIverMedal in All India Police MeetlNationalGamesor display of m C braveryduringthe course of of 0 C official duty Selection ofpersonsagainst55Io I C5 seats 111listllower school on the basis of ment I shall be done by a Promotion e Z Committee01 lhe basisctf ra r 1 Examinationof servicesand a5 2 A test lhereinaftcrcalle tCT7 1 CQ 13 i 2 testl101 Z CL a9Prade b1Law andpracticalpolicework and 3 An fnterview C 2 0i9 All constables irrespectiveof lheir educational qualiScationsshall be eligibleto appear for Bl test if they are under the age of 35 years and have completed 5 years of servlCe on 1 day of Januaryof the year in Which selection is made However if a Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 83 r CWPN029140f2010 ev6 constable belongingto reserved category who is recruitedafter the age of 27 yearsas per Government instructionslorders then he shall be allowed to appear for miilimum three consecutive chances after m 1 offive vearsofservice even ifhe 0 C3 has crossed the age of 35 years up to a I 0 minimum of 10years I Z ii9 All Constables of their r educational shall be eligibleto be brought on List B cum nlertt 08 basis if theyare under the age of 40 years ao Ct and have 5 Tleers nfservice on the 7 2 Ilrst dav of Januaryof the ycar in which Clm selectionis made 91 The State ofHaryanaissued instructionsdated 13022007 prescribingthe minlmum mentto fulfill the criteria for l cum4ltness relyingupon the observationsof this Court in the case of e Naresh Kumar Vs Sta of Harvana and others CWP No7952 of 20041decided on 0511 2004 Director General of Police Haryana issued these instructions prescribing minimr 1lch marks for selection to BI Jist under 3 5916quota Thc relcvant exlracl of tlle lnstructions dated 130 2007 0AnnexurePe79111 CWP NoS427 of Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 84 8 vd CWPN02914 of2010 7 2009 is hereunder 3 In view ofthe Honble High ln the Naresh Kumar case suplu lt has bcCIl decidedto fix thc bencil inarksfor fIttlessunder 35Io senioriocunfitness quota The 1Q assessmentof service record should be madc 0 C on the basis of education trainingcourses passedcommendationcertificates and length 0 I of service etCe as givenin PPR 137 All the 4r Z candidates who obtain a minimum 31 marks Q or more woold be deemed tt9 be fit 4C Z selection of Bl seots again6t 3594quotaonlhe 08 basis of interse seniority of the candidatesand ao Cr w for all such candidates intermsesenioritywould Z be the sole criteria for Oll their turn Ll under 35Io quotaln vlew of the explicitorder of HighCourt Please take further necessary action 53 Tlle vaidilYjof these instrucUons has been upheldby thls Court in Hawa Si Vs StatecfHarvana and others C No1194 of20059decided on 14052008 There are three sets of writ petitionsunder consideration The same are broadlycategorisedin the following mannerl a9 the eligibility ofthe candidates who appearedin 55Io merit Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 85 74 CWPN029140f2010 8 promotion quotaunderRule 137 6290 to beconsideredfor under 35Io on basis underrule 137 629iil even if theyhavefailed under 55Ioquota b9 considerationof the candidateswith less than 35 years ofageas on Ist dayof Januaryof the year in which selection is madein 3510 1 quotaof 0 C 9 intere seniorityof the candidates on the basis of bench marks C3 111terrnsof DGPs instnlocionsdalled 1302007 0 From the readingofRule 133 l9 it emergesas followsl Z a that 55Io of the seats allotted to a unit 111the Lower School 2 Course are meant to be filled ln on the basis of r r examination 08 b9 35Io ofthe seats on thebasisofsenioritunitness and 0 c l 10Io seats on the basis of consistent Ill a Z etc CL Selection against55 quota ls to be made by the PromotionalCommittee All the constables oftheir educational who are lessthan 35 years of ageand have completed5 yearsof service on Ist dayof Januaryof the year of 4 selection are eligibleto appear for B1 test under merit seats of 55Io quota Similarly all the constables irrespective of their educational qualificationhavingcompleted five rere of service and in tbe age of 40 years on the Ist day of Januaryof tbe year of selection Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 86 lO Pre CWPN029140f2010 8 are eligibleto be brought on list B Oll the basis of merit against35Ioquota Sportspersons under 100Ioquota are to be considered suliect to eIigibil ity 111 IJC 21UUVC 1V0u m C The controversyrelating to the eligibilityofthe candidates 0 who failed to secure the requisite merit in the examinatioll C3 under 55Io quota to be agalll considered under 35Io seniority C5 merlt quota cameto be consideredby a Division Bench of this Court Z 111Naresh Kumars case This Division Bench judgment was before the Honble Supreme Court SpecialLeave tr l rl to Cr Appealtr IiVlll No10409 cf2005 which hasbeen dismissediIl IinllnC Z c4 on 10052005 oo A similar issuecame up for considerationbefore this Court 7 Z lll the case of Hawa Singh Vs State of Harvanaand others 6CWP lle No1194 of20059decidedon 14052008 After admissionofthe writ petitionbythe Honble Division Bench the matter was consideredbya 1 learnedSingleJudgeof this Court for flnal disposal on 291 12006 Thc learned Single Judge ofthls Court wae ofthe opinion that oortmIn t provtsions of Rulel37 to the notlce of the Dlvision Bench and on that basis a referencc was made fot consideration of the writ petitionand other connected matters by a Division Bench of this Court The aforesaid wnt petition came to be heard by a Division Bench ofthis Court The Honble Division Bench Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 87 1 m CWP No914 of2010 10 vidc ils 016llcnt0132814052008 af6lrned the ratio in Naresh Kunlais lase lslIpralwith thefoliowing observatlol In view of the facts mentioned above these writ petitions are allowed 111the same terms as 111 Naresh Kumars case The m C are directed to deputethe 0 Ca to the first Lower School Course I which will commence aer the pronouncement C5 Ui judgment trl lhis case However The Z petitionershall be deemedto have qualificd 111 the Lower School Course from the date when C otherconstables havequalied whose naines 08 were approvedto undergo Lower Schooi CQ Coursevide selectlist Annexure P1 It is made mm Z e clear that if by getting date of Cl passiIlgthe Lower School Course the petiuonerbecarnecligible for promotionthen he will get only deemed benefits Wlthout gettingany actual flnancial benefits in view of Cme principleof no work no pay as laiddown by their Lordshipsof the Honble SupremeCourt 111 Union of India and another vs Tarsem Lal and others 0e006910 Supreme Court Cases 145 97 Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 88 aJ CWPN0914 of2010 11e Honble the Division Bench furtherconsideredthe validityof the instructionsdated 13022007andupheldits validitywith the following observationSl So far as CWP N03609 of 2007 is concerned in that writ pctitionselect list preparedto undergo m r lower School Course on the basis of instructiOllS 0 dated 13022007 as referred to above has been C As has beenheld earlier above said I C5 instructions are perfectlyjustiOedand are 111 I consonance with the directions issucd 19T r h 1c 1 VSAAb5 Z Court in NareshKumarscase supra9 15 tr The claims of some of the writ petitionersfor to e Lower School Course have been rejected on the groundthat theyhaving 08 ao failedin 559omerit quotaare not entited 10 be consideredtcr tleingbrougtlt C on List Bn91in 3594 quota The ciaims ofscuneoltbe writ petilioncrshave V3 Z been rejectedfor beingbroughtin List under35Ioquota on theground Ll that theywere of less than 35 years of age as on Ist dayof Januaryofthe year of selection In some cases the claims have been rejectedfor non the minimum 31 bench marks in tenns ofthe DGPs instructions dated 1302007 In Naresh Kumars case supra9 the Honble Division e Bench ruled the ellglbillty ofthe constables for their conslderntlon both ln 55Io and 35Io quota This judgmenthas attained finalitva The SLP has also been disinissed by the Honble SupremeCourt The ratio of the said judgmenthas been reiterated ln Hawa SingWscases supra9as also in Constable Dharmbir Vs State of Harvana and others 2009 9 RSJ 3 10 wherein the following observationshave been made Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 89 J CWP No2914of2010 ee12 13 So there are three distinct With thsir own uallcations ancl requirementsfor eligibilityfor considerson fhere lS no bar to considerationof a constable in any categoryif he llfllls theeligibility criteriaie ifhe is eligibleIll W L all three he has a statutoryrightto 0 consideration111all three categoriesThe Rules C do not categorize or require some mlnimum age I C for eligibility under any ofthe What it Z 4r specifies is the upper agc 1 c consirleration Il6p Il Z 1 under a particularcategory C Despitethese instructions certain issues referred to I hereinabove have again croppedUP The controversyregardingthe 08 Co eligibility ofcandidatesunder 35 yearsofagefor beingbrought on List B W2 for 35Io quota againcame up for considerationbyanotherDivision Bench Z ofthis Court in Dharmbirs case and Balrai Singhand othersVs 0m StateofHarvanaand others 2009629RSJ 463 In Dharmbirscase a Division Bench ofthis Court held as underl 111 1 6 Ll E1 conjointreadingofboth the subwruleswould show Lhat only tlle upperage limit pe has been prescribed under the rules and no rninimum age has been prescribedeither under subule 2 Ci9or sulrule 2 Cii9 which means that if a constable fulfllls the requirementof the upper age and the other qualiflcationsprescribed under the respectivecategory as per sulerule 2 there is Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 90 I4 rr CWPN029140F2010 3e no barto his considerationunder each of them thereby a constablewho is eligible ln underRule 137 621 can also be one consideredin the othercategoryunder Rule 133 6296iil of the PunjabPolice Rules as there is no between the rules as far as the C ellgibility iS oncerned with regardto the 0 C lninimuma8e as none is I C 18 The minimum age if prescribedby wayof I executive instructiollS would go againstthe e Z lnterest of the Constables who are otherwise m CC eligible under the statutoryRules Rule 137 029 I 6ii9confers a rightwhich a Constable attains on 08 thebasis of his seniorityin the service As and CQ whenhis turn comes based Utl lho 525 lv alirl 4e 2 Z to considerationdevolves on him TiiisrightOll Llv the basisofhis senioritycannot be deprived on the basisof executive instructions This would be in contraventionto the statutorv rules and therefore V C not sustainable 22 What emerges from the above discussions is that a constable who has completed5 years of service on the Ist day of Januaryof the year ln wliich the sclection is made is under the age of 35 years and is eligible for consideration arid selection for including his name in List B1 of Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 91 1 CWP N2914 of201 0 14 selectedconstablesfor admissionto Lower School Course under the 55Io quotaon the basis of merit as per Rule 137 214i1ofthe PunjabPuiice Rolcs 1934 and havlng in the test OB and failed or was unable to get m enlistmentdue to lower merit can also claim L 0 consideration and selection under the 35Io quota c Oll the basis of senioritycumnerit as perRule Z C5 137 0296ii9 if he 1S eligibleunder both the I categones 99 Z 4 As noticed above the constableswho have attained mlnlmum Cr 3 1 bench marksunder 35Io quotahave been ignoredand their juniorswere deputed to the course on the groundthattheyare more mentorious havillg 08 betterbench marks This issue is in fact covered under Naresh Kumars OO case 6supra9 and came to be claried in Balrai Singhs cass supra av Z Wherein it has been held that whereever a junior has been deputed for QW Lower School Course ignoringthe claim ofthe seniorsmerelyon the basis ofthe higherbench marks the senior be deputed for the course and he will be deemedto have passedthe course from the datehis juniorhas qualiOed 1 e In such sitliation senior wlll retain liis senioritll There is another aspcct of the rnMtera The DOPE inmructions dated 13022007 are onlyprospectivein nature Prior to these instructions no bench marks were prescribedunder the statutoryrules and thus all thOse constables who acquired eligibilityprior to issuance of these instructions have been denied the deputationto the Lower School Course for non achieving the minimum bench marks It is settled law that Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 92 5v CWPN020140f20 15 instructionscannot overrulethe statutoryrules Thus these instructions cannot be into serviceto deprive the constablesoftheir right for for not havingachievedthe minimum bench marksas under these instructionsissued latere ThUS SUCh Of thC constableswho becaine priorto issuanceofthese instructions and 1 for not achieving the minimum bench marksare to be deputed for Q Lower SchoolCourse and on successful ofthe course theyare 0 c to be lreaEeclsenior iliart l eir juniorswho were earlier deputed to tlle X C0 Lower SclioolClourse In other words theywi11retain tlleil seniorityfor beingbrought on List B1 that theywere for the Z course later than their juniorsor theydid not achieve minimum bench r marks Cr I Similarlysuch ofthe constableswho areignored on account a5 of achievingless than the prescribed bench marks then their juniorsare r alsoentitledto be deputed to the course and on completion ofthe same Wijl 3 Z retaintheir seniority over tbeirjunlrs r In some of the writ petitionsthe constables hive already the Lower School Course but they have been denied the senlorltyover their juniorson the groundthat the juniorswere either havingbetter bench marks or deputedfor the course prior in time than the C writ petitioners In view of the above observations these writ petitioners shall be deemed to be senior to their juniors deputedcarlier on account of better bench marks or on any other ground of eligibility To SUlll UP these petitlons ere disposedufwitll the follotvlngdirectionsl i9 Stch ufthe constableslpetitioners wlio have failed in 550 merit quota Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 93 1 1 i6 CWP No 2914of2010 16 are entitledto beconsideredfor beingbrought on List Bl under35Ioquota on the principle of providedtheyhave the requisite experience and are otherwiseeligible under therules iil sucb 0f1126constableswho were lcss tharl35 years ofagccis uii llle CI oftheir considerationbut not more than 40 vears thevINillbe e2titledto be t C brought on List B1 by themto Lower SchoolCourse 5 0 iii9 thepetitioners who acquiredeligibilitypriorto the DGPs instructions C3 dated 1302007 will be deputed for the course without the I C9 questionof minimumbench marks as prescribedunder the governtnent instructions and in their cases seniorityand other eligibilitycntena Z prescribed under the rules will be enoughfor their deputation to the course tr ivl the petitioners who becameeligiblefor aAer tlle issuanceof Cr Z the instructionsdated 13 122007 and 7 acllievedthe minimum bench 1lave 08 oo rnarks le deputedto the course theirjuniors have bcuer bench marks 7 Z v intermseseniorityof the constableswill be detenninedon the basis of Ll and not on the basis of passingof the Lower School Course in all such cases who are 1 ignored by the above directions However the interse seniorityof constableswill not be governedby the above directions where senior was G ignoredcn account of pendencyof anv disciplinwyproceedings or I4il0 suffercd any other disqualificationfor dcputationto Lower Schuol Course vi deputationof the petitionersshall be made on the basis of thelr seniorityin their respectivedistricts and againsthe available vacancleSe Let the claim ofthe petitionersbe considered in the light ofthe above directions and their deputationwheremever required be made 111 Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 94 l 1 6v CWPN02914of2010 17 accordancewith the abovedirections A copy ofthis order be placedon the record of each connected file 190 11082010 e 6PERMODKOHLII BLS JUDGE m Oc C 0 Notel VVhetherto be referredto the YES C0 C5 1 Z C 08 ao V3 Z Ll Anita Rani 2014.05.01 11: 23 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document