Punjab-Haryana High Court
Baljeet Kaur And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others on 31 January, 2013
Author: Augustine George Masih
Bench: Augustine George Masih
C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT
CHANDIGARH
C.W.P.No.773 of 2012
Date of Decision:- 31.01.2013
Baljeet Kaur and another ....Petitioner(s)
vs.
State of Punjab and others ....Respondent(s)
***
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
***
Present:- Mr.Amit Chopra, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr.Harsimrat Singh Sethi, Addl.A.G, Punjab.
***
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral)
Petitioners have approached this Court with a grievance that despite the criteria having been specifically prescribed in the advertisement dated 3.10.2011 (Annexure P-8) calling upon the eligible candidates to apply for recruitment to the post of Lady Constables in various districts of Punjab, the same, during the process of selection, has been changed which is not permissible in law.
Counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners fulfilled the educational qualifications and the age criteria, which was fixed as per the advertisement and accordingly applied for appointment to the post of female Constables. Their applications were considered and they were called for participating in the selection process. Criteria for selection C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -2- was laid down in the advertisement dated 3.10.2011 which was published in Punjabi Newspaper 'Ajit'. The physical standards and physical efficiency test of the petitioners was conducted on 9th & 10th of November, 2011. Before the interview could be held, a fax message was received from the Chairman-cum-Inspector General of Police, Zone Recruitment Board for Female Constables, 2011, Bathinda by the Chairman-cum-SSP, Faridkot, a copy of which was also forwarded to the Deputy Superintendent of Police participating in the selection process. This fax message is dated 10.11.2012 (Annexure R-4/T). In this fax message, it was stated that Standing Order No.3/2010 issued by the Director General of Police, Punjab be given effect to as far as the standard for physical efficiency test was concerned. Earlier, the advertised standard for the female candidates was that 800 meters race was to be completed in four minutes (one chance), long jump was to be for 3.25 meters (three chances) and high jump 1.05 meters (three chances), which as per Standing Order No.3/2010, long jump was reduced to 3.00 meters (three chances) and high jump was reduced to 0.95 meters (three chances). This, counsel for the petitioner contends, cannot be done once the selection process has been initiated. He contends that the selection which has been made by lowering the standard of physical efficiency in the light of Standing Order No.3/2010 issued by the Director General of Police, is not sustainable and the candidates who had cleared the first two stages of the recruitment process and as per the criteria laid down in the advertisement, had a prior right for consideration for appointment.
Only 365 female candidates cleared the physical efficiency test as per the advertised criteria. Both the petitioners were amongst those C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -3- candidates and, therefore, should have been considered for appointment on the basis of advertised criteria. He contends that the criteria having been changed in the midway, the non-selection of the petitioners cannot sustain. For this, counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon the judgments passed by the Supreme Court in the cases of Amlan Jyoti Borooah vs. State of Assam and others, 2009 (4) SLR 588, Rakhi Ray and others vs. The High Court of Delhi and others, 2010 (2) SLR 193, Pramod K.Pankaj vs. State of Bihar and others, 2004(1) SCT 83, State of Orissa and another vs. Mamata Mohanty, 2011 (3) SCC 436 wherein it has been held that once the selection process has been initiated, the criteria cannot be changed midway. He, on this basis, contends that the writ petition deserves to be allowed and a direction be issued to the respondents to consider the petitioners as per the criteria advertised and thereafter declare their result.
On the other hand, counsel for the respondents has submitted that the petitioners have not impleaded the selected candidates as party- respondents. He further states that the petitioners should have approached this Court if they had any grievance at the time when the criteria was changed. Once the petitioners have felt that they are not making the grade, they approached this Court by filing the present writ petition by asserting that the criteria has been changed midway which is not permissible. That apart, he contends that the reason for change in criteria was due to the fact that only 365 female candidates had cleared the initial standard which was fixed in the advertisement. The posts advertised being 600 for Faridkot District, a decision was taken to give effect to Standing Order No.3/2010 which had been issued earlier by the Director General of Police. It is not a C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -4- fresh criteria which has been laid down by the Selection Committee but the criteria was already finalized which has only been given effect to and further he states that Standing Order No.3/2010 which has been implemented by the Selection Committee is not under challenge in the present writ petition and, therefore, the claim as made by the petitioners cannot be accepted. Counsel has also referred to para 12 of the written statement to contend that all the 2517 candidates, who had applied for the post of Lady Constables, have been subjected to the same criteria which was based on Standing Order No.3/2010 and, therefore, no prejudice has been caused to the petitioners. He further states that there was no distinction drawn between the candidates who had cleared the criteria as laid down in the advertisement and those who had been subjected to the criteria as laid down in Standing Order No.3/2010. He, on this basis, contends that the present writ petition deserves to be dismissed.
I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the records of the case. An advertisement dated 3.10.2011 was published in Punjabi Newspaper 'Ajit' vide which applications were invited from Male and Female candidates for filling up 3726 posts of male and 2000 posts of female in the rank of Constables in District Police Cadre of Police Department. The minimum educational qualification prescribed for recruitment is 10 +2 in any subject or its equivalent and every candidate should have passed Punjabi as compulsory/optional subject in Matric examination. However, for ex-servicemen minimum qualification would be matric. The age fixed was between 18 to 25 years and the cut off date for determining the age was C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -5- 1.1.2011. Relaxation in upper age for the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes was provided for as per the Government Rules. Similar was the position with regard to the Ex-servicemen who were to be given relaxation upto 3 years plus the years of service rendered by them in defence force. Before selection, medical examination was to be done, as per Rule 10.64 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, by the Civil Surgeon, who shall certify a candidate to be physically fit for service. Selection criteria which is the bone of contention in the present case was also advertised and Clause 6 of the said advertisement deals with the same, which reads as follows:-
"6. Selection Criteria:
In case of men candidates selection will be made by District Recruitment Board and in case of women candidates by Central Recruitment Board. Selection process will be in three phases:
a) Physical Measurement
b) Physical Efficiency Test
c) Interview A) Physical Standard Minimum Height for Men candidates: 5'-7" (Five Feet Seven Inches) Minimum Height for Women candidates: 5'-3" (Five Feet Three Inches) Candidates who fulfill the required educational qualification and age will be examined for height. Physical Efficiency Test C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -6- (P.E.T.) of all eligible candidates will be done. B) Physical Efficiency Test Only those candidates who fulfill the Minimum Physical Standard test will be eligible to participate in Physical Efficiency Test, who fulfill the qualifications and below noted event:-
Candidates who fulfill the aforesaid physical measurement will participate in physical efficiency test (P.E.T.):-
For Men Candidates 1600 Meter Race 6 Minute 30 Seconds 1 (only one chance) 2 Long Jump 3.80 M.(3 chance) 3 High Jump 1.10 M. (3 chance) For Women Candidates 800 Meter Race 4 Minute 1 (only one chance) 2 Long Jump 3.25 M. (3 chance) 3 High Jump 1.05 M. (3 chance) Ex-Servicemen:
Physical Efficiency Test for Ex-Servicemen 1400 Meter Race/Walk 12 Minute 4 (only one chance) 5 10 Up-down Physical Efficiency Test for Ex-Servicewomen 800 Meter Race/Walk 08 Minute 6 (only one chance) Remarks:- Candidates should be eligible in all the above events.C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -7-
C) Interview:
4 Marks will be given for interview D) Candidates will be given marks on the basis of educational qualification and height as below noted :
i) Educational/Qualification :
Educational Qualification Marks 10+2 (I.C.S.E., P.S.E.B., C.B.S.E. or its equivalent) 10 B.A.-I, B.Sc.-I/B.Com-I or its equivalent 11 B.A.-II, B.Sc.-II/B.Com-II or its equivalent 12 B.A.-III, B.Sc.-III/B.Com-III or its equivalent 13 M.A./LLB/Engg./M.Sc./M.C.A./ M.B.B.S./M.P.E.D./B.D.S. Or its equivalent 14 M.Phil/Ph.d./L.L.M. 15
ii) Educational/Qualification for Ex-Servicewomen Qualification Marks Matriculation 10 10+2 (I.C.S.E., P.S.E.B., C.B.S.E. or its equivalent) 11 B.A.-I, B.Sc.-I/B.Com-I or its equivalent 12 B.A.-II, B.Sc.-II/B.Com-II or its equivalent 13 B.A.-III, B.Sc.-III/B.Com-III or its equivalent 14 M.A./LLB/Engg./M.Sc./M.C.A./ M.B.B.S./M.P.E.D./B.D.S. Or its equivalent 15
iii) Height (Men Candidates) 6' and above 15 Marks 5'-11'' and above 14 marks 5'-10'' and above 13 marks 5'-9'' and above 12 marks 5'-8'' and above 11 marks 5'-7'' and above 10 marks C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -8-
iv) Height (Women Candidates) 5'-4'' and above 11 marks 5'-7'' and above 14 marks 5'-6'' and above 13 marks 5'-5'' and above 12 marks 5'-3'' and above 10 marks Note:- Merit of candidates will be considered on the basis of marks obtained in the educational qualification, height and interview."
A perusal of the above criteria would show that the selection process was to be in three phases; first being the physical measurement which was followed by physical efficiency test and thereafter the interview. A candidate was subjected to the first stage of physical standard where minimum height was prescribed for the male and female candidates. Candidates who passed this criteria and should also fulfil the required educational qualification and age, were to be subjected to physical efficiency test of all eligible candidates. The criteria for the physical efficiency test was also clearly mentioned for the different categories. Female candidates were required to clear 800 meters race in four minutes (only one chance), long jump 3.5 meters (three chances) and high jump 1.05 meters (three chances). The remarks given under this were that the candidate should be eligible in all above events. The effect thereof was that a candidate who cleared all these events would be subjected to the third stage which was the interview. A candidate who obviously did not clear the first stage, would not reach the second stage and one who does not clear the second stage would not reach the third stage. As per advertised criteria, the C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -9- first two stages were carried out by the Selection Committee on 9th and 10th of November, 2011. It so happened that out of this selection process at second stage, only 365 female candidates cleared the required standards. This being the position, a decision was taken by the Chairman of the Zone Recruitment Board of Female Constables, 2011 to enforce Standing Order No.3/2010 and accordingly, a fax message was issued to the Chairman of the Faridkot Selection Committee. This Standing Order No.3/2010 diluted the minimum standards prescribed for the physical efficiency test. The distinction between the two has also been highlighted in the said Standing Order which reads as follows:
Standards Mentioned earlier in the Standards mentioned in Standing Order Advertisement No.3/2010 Race : 800 Meters in 4 minutes, one Race: 800 Meters in 4 minutes, one chance. chance.
Long Jump : 3.25 Meter, three chances. Long Jump : 3.00 Meter, three chances. High Jump : 1.05 Meter, three chances. High Jump : 0.95 Meter, three chances.
According to this situation, another chance was given to the female candidates who had failed to clear the physical efficiency test as per the standards advertised. This decision is dated 12.11.2011. This chance was given to all the candidates who had not cleared the first criteria which was laid down as per the advertisement. The candidates who now cleared the second stage were much more than the original who had cleared the physical efficiency test. Thereafter, the selection process proceeded as per the further criteria laid down in the advertisement. In the result of the selection, which was ultimately declared on 18.12.2011 (Annexure P-13) C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -10- in Punjabi Newspaper 'Ajit', name of the petitioners did not figure in the said select list. It is at this stage that the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
The case was listed before this Court on 13.1.2012 when notice of motion was issued to the respondents and vide the interim order two posts of lady Constables were ordered to be kept vacant for the petitioners. The basic question which needs to be answered in the present writ petition is whether the respondents could have, after having advertised the criteria on 3.10.2011 (Annexure P-8), proceeded to change the same when the selection process has been initiated. The answer to this question is nothing else but No. This is apparent and by now is a well settled position in the light of the various judgments which have been passed by the Supreme Court, reference of which was made by the counsel for the petitioners in Amlan Jyoti Borooah, Rakhi Ray and others, Pramod K.Pankaj and Mamata Mohanty's cases (supra). The process, therefore, initiated after changing the criteria by the respondents vide communication dated 12.11.2011 cannot but be said to be not in consonance with law. This Court does not intend to quash the selection process as such on this ground for the reason that no other candidate except these two have approached this Court laying challenge to the revised criteria so framed by the respondents for going about the process of selection. Further, no prejudice would be caused to any selected candidate as two posts have already been kept vacant for the petitioners vide interim order dated 13.1.2012. That takes care of the objection raised by the counsel for the State that the selected candidates are not a party and, therefore, the C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -11- writ petition cannot proceed.
The assertion of the counsel for the respondents that the same benchmark was made applicable to all candidates who had participated in the selection process and, therefore, no prejudice was caused to the petitioners cannot be accepted in the light of the legal position that the criteria cannot be changed midway and prejudice has indeed been caused to the petitioners as the zone of consideration had been enlarged. This is apparent from the fact that as per the initial criteria which was advertised, only 365 candidates having cleared the physical efficiency test would have competed for the 600 posts of Constables advertised whereas with the revised criteria, which was introduced vide communication dated 12.11.2011, the number of candidates who had cleared the second stage of selection had been enlarged to a great extent which had actually diminish the chances of selection of the petitioners. The prejudice being clear from the above contention of the counsel for the respondents, cannot be accepted.
Another contention which has been raised by the counsel for the respondents was that there are large number of candidates who have in the final selection got higher marks than the petitioners and, therefore, prejudice would be caused to such candidates. This contention of the counsel for the respondents again cannot be accepted in the light of the fact that the initial criteria which was advertised by the respondents was required to be followed by them and, therefore, when that criteria had been given effect to, the candidates who had cleared the said process of second stage could not be equated with those candidates who had now cleared the second stage of physical efficiency test on the diluted standards as per the C.W.P.No.773 of 2012 -12- communication dated 12.11.2011.
A contention has further been pressed into service to the effect that there would be similar candidates who would probably have been left out of the selection, who are not party to the case and, therefore, their claim would be adversely affected. There is a waiting list also and those candidates would also be adversely affected. This contention of the counsel for the respondents again cannot be accepted for the reason that none has approached this Court with any grievance with regard to the selection criteria adopted by the respondents and, therefore, had there been any prejudice, they would have approached the Court with the same.
In view of the above, the present writ petition is allowed. Direction is issued to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for appointment as per the initial criteria which was advertised on 3.10.2011 and if the petitioners make the grade, as per the said criteria, out of the candidates who had cleared the second stage, as per the then fixed criteria, appointment letters be issued to them within a period of one month. It goes without saying that the petitioners shall also be entitled to all the consequential benefits, except for the financial benefits.
January 31, 2013 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE