60 1 CWP No 2914 of2010 1 r ln the HighCourt ofPunjaband Haryanaat Chandigarh Dale 01 decisioill l l 982010 1 CH 0 2914 of2010 Vs StateofHaryana and others 2 CVvPNo6427of2009 1 C Krishan Iumar and others Vs StateofHaryana and Othcrs 0 3 CWPN0 3329 of2010 C RajbirSinghand othersVs StateoflIaryana dnd othcrS C 4 CHP No1403 of2009 2 Prem Singt Vs State ofHarvanoancl othors r 5 CWP No 3401 f2010 EIlC Kulbir Singhand anotherVs StateofFIaryana aild otllcrs otj 6 CWP No 7536 of2010 rl2 KaptanSinghVs State ofHaryana and others m 7 CWP No203 of2010 Om 10eshRaj and othersVs StateofHaryana and others 8CWP No8147of2010 EHC Rarn Mehar and othersVs Statcof Ilwyanaand others ne 4 9 ClVP Nu 6443 of2009 C Jai Pal Euld another Vs StateofHaryanaand othors 10 CWPM066190f2009 Salyawan EHC Vs S ofana and others 11 CWP N0104870f2009 Head Constable Ashok Kumar Vs State ofHaryanaand Othcrs 12 CWP No 12237 of2009 Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 61 1 CWPNr9140f2010 L4 NarenderKumar ConstableVs StateofHarvanaand others 13CWP Nol248of2009 Jit SinghEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others 14 CWP No 12253of2009 SubhashChanderEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others j C 13 CWP No 16975of2009 0 Krishan ilulr EHC 7 StaleofHsreoa aiid othelS C 16CIVP5Io18430of2009 Z C5 Panna Lal EHC Vs StateofHaryana and others t 17CWP No 18863of2009 Z Raj Kumar and another Vs StateofHaryana and others 18 CWP No 18919 of2009 Kamal Parkash EHC Vs StateofHaryanaand others 06 19 CWP No 636 of2010 0 4 Lady onstable RajbalaVs StateofHaryana anu Glll 2 20 CWP N2775 of 2010 Il Rishi Parshadand others Vs StateofHaryanaand others 21 CWP No 2875 of2010 LadyConstable SumanVs StateofHaryanaand others 22 CWP N029680f2010 Ce Sada Im EHC Vs Ste ofHaryanaand others 23 CWP No 3338 of2010 Kaptain Sinehand another Vs StateofHaryanaad Giil2t 2 24 CWP N033670f2010 EHC Mohan Lal Vs StateofHaryanaand others Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 62 d CWP No 2914 of2010 3 25 CWP No 3556 of2010 Hans Rain and others VS State ofHarvana and others 26 CWP No 4256 ci 2010 Hari Krishan HC Vs Financial Commissioner c PrincipalSecretary to GovemmentofHaryana and others 27 CWP No 4274 of2010 1e Amar SinghEHC Vs StateofHaryana and others 0 C 28 CWP No 4749 of2010 Mohinder SinghEASI and another Vs StateofHaryanaand others C 29 CWP No 4765 of2010 et Z Chhaju Ram and aoother l s Stateof Haryanand others rV 30 CltP No 4960 of2010 C RajbirSinghand othersVs StateofHaryana and others Otj 31CWP N04963 of2010 QO SatbirSinghVs StateofHaryana and others C nmw Z 32 CNo923 of2010 CL Jaivir Singhand othersVs StateofHaryana and others 33 CWP No 6031 of2010 HardayalI1C aild othersVs State01arr7aila 8n4othcrs CeeV COR1 HONBLE MR JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Presentl Mr SK Redhu Mrikram Singh Mr1 Yadav MrDinesh Malik Mrlritam Saini Mrurender Lamba MrRP Singh Advocatesfor the petitioners MrRS Kundu Addl AG Haryanaforthe respondents PERMOD KOII J Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 63 1 CWP No914 of2010 4 0 the basislfcomo017 and idenlical issoes bolll ttl cts and cJil law all thesepetitions are beingdecidedbythis common order The entire controversyrelates to the of Rule 133 ofthe PunjabPolice Rules 1934 as applicable to the StateofHaryana and amended vide Punjab Police 1aryanaAmendmet Rules 2001 m hereinafterreferredto as the Rules This rule relatesto for 0 Lower School Course and for enlistingof the eligibleofflcers in List B 4 for their promotionThe amendedrulc subjectmatter of debate in the C presenivritpetitionsis hereunderl 133mSelection of candidatesfor admission to Z courses at thePolice TrainingCollege l9 List C B n Form 133 shall be maintained by each of Police It shall include the 08 C names of all constablesselected for admission C 3 to the Lower School Course to be held at the Z Police TrainingCollege Selectinn to the list B shail be made i11tne month of Jariliarv each yearand shall be limited to the number of seats allottedto the district for the year The number C ofseats in Lower School Course in a year shall be on the basis of existingvacancies and the vacancles likely to be created within one year 111 the respectiveunlt 55010 of the seats allotted to a unit iil the l e r 1 r0 94 School Collrse a 0 6 shall be fllled in on the basis of a colnpetitiTe 1 Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 64 1 9 CWP No2914 of2010 5 1 examlnatlon 35 on the basis of seniori cumfitness and 10Io on the basisof consistent performance in Gold or Silvcr MedaI in All India Police IvleetlNationaiGamesor displayof m braveryduringthe course of performance of 0 C offlcial duty Selectionof personsagainst55Io C5 seats 10 listllower school on the basis of ment shall be done by a Promotion Z Committeeon thebasisof L t 1 Examinationof servicesand 08 2 A competitive test Ihereinafter ealled 1 0 wmo test lIll Z a Prade b Law and practicalpolicework and 3 An IntervieWe 1n 2 All constables irrespectiveof their educational qualificatklr eh211be eliizible to appearfor Bel testifthey are undsr the age of 35 years and have completed 5 years of servlce on 1 day of Januaryof the year 111 which selection is made However if a Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 65 a4 CWP No 2914 of2010 6 constable belonging 1 Cat083I lu fescl 9 0 ei who 18 recruiteo aPierattaining the age of 27 years as perGovernment instructionslorders then he shall be allowed to appear for minlmum three consecutive chances after t f of flve years of service even if he 0 has crossed the age of 35 years up to a 0 mlnimum of l OyearSe CA 4 Z ii Ali Constahlel irrcspectiteof their e educational sha11be eligibleto be broughton List B1 senioritycum ment otj basis if theyare under the age of 40 years CQ andhave 5 years of service on the avm Z first day of Januaryof the year in which tl selection is made 59 rllle StafeofFiarvana iNslled mstructiolls dated 13022007 the minimum merit tc fulfill the criteria for senioritve 1 cumefitness relying upon the observations of this Court in the case of Ce NareshKumar Vs State of Harvana and others CWP No952 of 20049 decided on 05112004 Director General ofPolice Haryana issued these instructions prescribingminimum bench marks for selection to B list under 35Io quota The relevant extract of the dated 13022007 64nnexureP in CWP No6427 of Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 66 e CWP N029140f2010 7 2009 is hereunder 3 In view ofthe Honble High lll the Naresh Kumar case supra it has been decided to fix the bench marks for fitnessunder 35Io quota The 1 C asscssnlenr of service rccord should be made 0 C on the basis of education trainingcourses passedcommendationcertificates and length C of service etCe as givenin PPR 137 All the Z candidates who obtaina mlnlmum 31 marks t C or more would be deemed to be flt for selection of B l seats against35Io quotaon the 06 oasis of interse senioritvof the candidatesand 10 e5 for all such candidales inteese senioritv would ea Z be the sole criteria for deputingon their turn Ll under 35Io quotaln Vlew of the explicitorder of High Court Please take further necessary action accordingly 57 The validityof these instructions has been upheldby this C Court in Hawa Singh Vs State ofHarvana and others CWP No194 of20051decided on 14052008 There are tllree sets cf writ petitionsunder consideration The same are broadlycategorised in the following manner a9 the eligibilityofthe candidateswho appearedin 55010merit Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 67 0 rl CWPN029140f2010 8 promotlonquotaunderRule 137 6i9to be consideredfor promotion under3596on senioriocummerit basis underniIo 1 9 I2 911 if eT715n 1 61 r 41 1 theyhavclaled under 55Ioqllota b considerationof the candidateswith lessthan 35 years ofageas on Ist dayof Januaryof the year lll which selection is made in 35Io C quotaof senioritycuremerit 0 C C interse senioritv of the candidates OIl the basis of bench marks lIl terms of DGPs instructionsdated 13022007 C5 From thereadingofRule 137 it emerges as follows Z 6al that 5546 ofthe seats allctted to a unit in thc 2cr So8 Course are incant to 5e fllled lli On rre bass of colrpetitive L examlnatlOIl 06 b 35Ioofthe seats on the basisofseniorituritness and 0 c 9 1OIo seats on the basisof consistentoutstanding performance Va4 111 Z etC L1 Selection against55Io quota 1S to be made by the PromotionalCommittee All the constables oftheir educationaloualication 1 lcss lhan PV wnc are 3 5 years of age and have comoleted5 vears of serviee on Ist da of Jalluaryof the year of C selection are eligibleto appear for Bel test under merit seats of 55010 quot Similarly all the constables irrespectiveof their educational qualificationhavingcompletedfive years of service and lIl the age of 40 years on the Ist day of Januaryof the year of selection Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 68 S 0 CWP No291 4 of2010 0 are eligibleto be brought on list B1 on the basis of senioritycun merit against35Io quota Sportspersons under 10Io quota are to be separately considered subjectto eligibility 111 the above two categones m l The controversyrelatingto the eligibilityof the candidates 0 who fa110to 5ecure Ehe Ieoulslte merit lIi the competitive cxaminatlOn C under 552i6UOta to oe again considered under 35Io senioritumm C5 ment quota cameto be consideredbya Division Bench of this Court r 111Naresh Kumars case 6supra9This Division Bench judgment was challengedbefore the Honble SupremeCourt in SpecialLeave to C 4 AppealCivi No10409 of2005 which hasbeen dismissedin limine 06 on 10052005 e A similar issue came up for considerationbefore this Court Imn Z in the case of Hawa Sinzh Vs State of Ilarvana and othe CWP Ll No1194 of20059decidedon 14052008 After admissionofthe writ petitionby the Honble Division Bench the matter was considered by a learned SingleJudge of this Court for final disposalon 29 1 2006 The learned SingleJudge ofthis Court was ofthe opinionthat certain C prOVlSlons of Rule 137 ofthe rules were not broughtto the notice of the Division Bench and on that basis a reference was made for consideration of the writ petitionand other connected matters by a Division Bench of this Court The aforesaid writ petitioncame to be heard by a Division Bench ofthis Court The Honble Division Bench Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 69 1h 1 1 CWP No 2914 of2010 10 vide its judgmentdated 14052008 afflrmed the ratio ln Naresh Kumarscase upra with thefollowing observationsl ln view of the facts r r0r05 re n nlonve these 1lltvAsAO wrlt petlllOllSare allowed lll the sarrie terms as lll Naresh Kumars case 6supra The 1 are directed to deputethe 0 C petitioner to the first Lower School Course C which will commence afer the pronouncement of judgment 111 this case However The r Z petitionershall be deemedto have qualified 2 111 C the Lower Schooi Course 1T0111 2212Oate 0re11217 other constables have qualifiedwhosle names otj were approvedto undergo Lower School C Coursevide selectlist AnnexureP1 It is made clear that if by getting date of Clm passing the Lower School Course the petltlonerbecameeligiblefor promotionthen he will get only deemed benefits without ng any actual Snancial benetits ln vlew ot C principleof 10 1uork no pav as laid down bv W their Lordshipsof the Honble SupremeCourt ln Union of India and another VS Tarsem Lal and others c2006110 SupremeCourt Cases 145 99 Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 70 4 CWP No 2914 of2010 l r Honble the Division Bench forther considered tbc validitv cf the instructionsdated 13022007 and upheldits validitywith the following observations So far as CWP No3609 of2007 is concemed 111 that writ petitionselect list prepared to undergo m 1 Lower SchoolCourse on thebasisof ilnstructlOns 0 dated 13022007 as referred to above has been C challengedAs has been held earlier above said C3 lnstructions are perfectIyjustifiedand are ln 4 consonance with the directions issued by this Z Court in Naresh Kumars case 6supra 13 l The claims of some of the writ petitionersfor deputing to Lower School Course have been rejectedon the groundthat theyhaving 08 failed in 55Io merit quotaare not entitledto be consideredfor beingbrought 1 on List B1 in 350Ioquota The claims of some ofthe writ petitioners have au Z beenrejectedfor beingbroughtin List B1 under 35Io quotaon theground Cle thatthev uere oflessthan 35 years ofaee ason Ist dayof Januaryoltne yearof selection ln some cases thc claims have 0en rejectedfor noo achievingthe minimum 31 bench marks lIl terms ofthe DGPs instructions dated 13022007 In Naresh Kumars case supra9the Honble Division ee0 Bench ruled the eligibilityofthe constables for their consideration both in 55Io and 35Io quota This judgmenthas attained finality The SLP has also been dismissed by the Honble SupremeCourt The ratio of the said judgmenthas been reiterated lll Hawa SingWscases csupra9as also in Constable Dharmbir Vs Stkueof Harvana antherse 2009 10RSJ 310 wherein the followingobservations have been made Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 71 r C1 CWP No 2914 of2010 12 13 So there are three distinct categorieswith their own qualiflcationsand for eligibilityfor consideration There is no bar to considerationof a constable in any categoryifhe 111lSllstheelty 6fiteria leCe ifhe is eligiblelll L 011three categoriesile nas a statutoryright tU 0 consideration lIl all three categoriesThe Rules C do not categorize or requiresome mlnlmum age C5 for eligibilityunder any ofthe categuricsWllol 4 specifiesis the upper agelimit for consideration Z under a particularcategory C Despite these instructions certain 1SSues referred to r hereinabcve9ve againcroppedup The cuuO 011 ir3rrllnll tlle 9 08 eligibilitY Ol candiclales under 35 years of ace for beingbroughtori List B 1 0 for 35Io quota againcameup for considerationby another Division Bench 2 Z of this Court 111Dharmbirs case supra9and Balrai Singhand others Vs lm State ofHaryanaand others 2009 629RSJ 463 In Dharmbirs case supra a Division Bench ofthis Court held as under 7 17 A conjointreadingofboth the subrules would show that only the upperage limit e has been prescribed under the rules and no lIlinlmum age has been prescribedeither under suerule 2 i9 or suierule 2 ii9 which means 11ui ifa constable fulfllls the requirementofthe upper age and the other qualiflcationsprescribedunder the respecve category as per subule 2 there lS Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document e 72 L CWP N029140f2010 13 no bar to his consideration under each of them Msaningtherebya constable who is eligibleln one categoryunaer Rule 13 can also be considered in the other categoryunder Rule 133 29 ii9of the PunjabPolice Rules as there is no m lr bilrcation between the rules as far as the 0 eligibilitylS concerned with regard to the C rninlmum age as none is prescribed C 18 The minimum age if prescribedby wav of executlve instructl ons wouid 4 41 461115t 1 2 Z intere of the Constsbles who are olherwise C eligibleunder the statutoryRules Rule 137 ii9 confers a rightwhich a Constable attains on 08 the basis of his seniority111 the service As and when his turn comes based on the senioritv a riglil um Z to consideration devolves on him This righton Clw the basisofhis senioritycannot be deprived on the basis of executive instructions This would be lrl C contl aventlon to the statlltoryrules and therefore C 1101sustainable 22 What emerges from the above discussions lS that a constable who has completed5 years of service on the Ist day of Januaryof the year lll which the selection is made is under the age of35 years and is eligible for consideration and selection for includinghis name in List B1 of Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 73 e1 0 CWP N02914 ot2010 14 selectedconstablesfor admission to Lower School Course under the 55Io quotaon the basis of ment as per Rule 137 29 i9ofthe PunjabPolice Rules 1934 and having participated in the competitive test 6B and failed or was unable to get enlistment due t0 lower merll ran also claim C considerationand selectlon under the 35Iluota 0 C OO the basis of senioritycumneritas per Rule Z C 137 ii9 if he 1S eligibleunder both the Z categones 93 Z As noticed above the constables who have attainedminimum 9 C 31 bench marks under 35Io quotahavebeen ignoredand their juniorswere deputedto the course on the ground that theyare more mentorious having 08 betterbench marks This issue is in fact covered under Naresh Kuma C0 4 case 775uoriind carle to be ciarjSed i t nlrai Singhs cass supral mwm Z where Il hasbeen held that wllereier a junior l ias becn deputedfor 0 CL Lower School Course ignoringthe claim ofthe seniors merelyon the basis of the higherbench marks the senior be deputedfor the course and he will 7 be deemed to have passedthe course from the date his juniorhas qualifled In such situation senior will retain his seniority Il There is another aspect of the matter The DGPs instructions dated 13022007 are onlyprospectiveln nature Prior to these instructions no bench marks were prescribedunder the statutorl 11e9 and thus all those corlstablcs who acquiredeligibilityprior 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 Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 74 i mr9 CWTPNo 2914 of2010 15 governmentlnstructions cannot overrule the statutoryrules Thus these lnstructlons cannot be pressedinto serVlCe to deprivethe constablesoftheir right 8w ceoutauon for no liavingaciiIeved Ule minimum bench marksas prescri5e8unaer these instructions issued later lhus such of Ule constables who became eligiblepriorto issuanceofthese instructionsand m C ignoredfor not achieving the Illllllmum bench marks are to be deputed for 0 Lower School Course and on successfulcompletionofthe course theyare C to be treated senior than their juniorswho were earlier deputedto the C5 Lower School Course In other words theywill retain their seniorityfor beingbroughton List B 1 that theywere deputed for the 2 2 course Iatcr thon their iuniors or thev did oot aciucvG 11111Iil5cll2217012 tr marks Cr Similarly such ofthe constableswho are ignoredon account 5 CO of achievingless than theprescribedbench marks then their juniorsare em also entitled to be deputed to the course and on completionofthe same will Z retain their seniorityover theirjuniors Clw In some of the writ petitionsthe constables have already completedthe Lower School Course but they have been denied the 1 7 seniorio over their juniorson the ground that the juniorswere either havingbelter bench marks or deputedfor the course prior in time than the Cee Wnt peotloners 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 sum up these petitionsare disposedofwith the followingdirectionsm 0 Such ofthe who have failed in 55010merit quota Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 75 3 CWP N02914 of2010 16 are entitledto be consideredfor beingbrought on List B1 under 35Io quota on the principleof senioritycumneritprovidedtheyhave the requisite experience and are otherwiseeligibleunderthe rules ii such ofthe constableswho were less than 35 years ofageas on theday oftheir consideration but not more than 40 years theywill be entitledto be brought on List t l by 3putingthem to Lourr School Course 9 0 iii theletitioner whn acquircdeligibilitoloriorto lllc DClPs instructioll C dated 13 022007 will be deputedfor the course without considering the C5 questionof minimum bench marks as prescribedunder the government lnstructlons and in their cases seniorityand other eligibilitycriteria Z prescribed under the rules will be enoughfor their deputation to the course C ivl the petitioners who becameeligiblefor deputation aer the issuance of the instructionsdated 13022007 and have achieved the minimum bench 08 rnarks be deputedto the course thcir Ioniorshave better CJO J bench marksl mmv Z vl interse seniorityof the constableswill be detennined on the basis of Llm their seniorityin their respective districtsin the and not on the basis of passingof the Lower School Course in all such cases who are ignored by the above directions However the interse seniorityof constables will not be governedby the above directions where senior was 4e gnored on account of pendencyof any disciplinaryproceedingsor who suffered any other disqualiflcation for deputation to Lower School Course vil deputatlonot t11epetitionerss11211Ioe mede C11the basis of their senlontv 112their respectivedistricts and agairasttbe avaiiable vacancleSe Let the claim ofthe petitioners be consideredin the lightofthe above directions and their deputationwheremever required be made in Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 76 CWPNo29i4of2010 11 accordancewith the abovedirections A copy ofthis order be placed on the record of each connected 61e n 11082010 4a PERMOD KOHLI9 BLS JUDGE m C 0 Notel Ilzrher lo be rerre6 to the Renortel er s C4 l 191 CAO el 1 4r Z C1 4t otj 0 2 Z Clm Gupta Suruchi 2014.05.06 13: 50 True Scanned Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document