Punjab-Haryana High Court
Deepak And Others vs State Of Haryana And Another on 7 December, 2018
Bench: A.B. Chaudhari, H.S. Madaan
CWP No.10792 of 2018 (O&M) and other connected petitions -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Reserved on 03.12.2018
Date of decision: December 07, 2018
CWP No.10792 of 2018 (O&M)
Deepak and others
......Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another
....Respondents
CWP No.11963 of 2018 (O&M)
Prince and another
......Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another
....Respondents
CWP No.16194 of 2018 (O&M)
Ankush Janghu
......Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.B. CHAUDHARI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN
Present: Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate and
Mr. G.S. Gopera, Advocate
for the petitioner(s) (in CWP No.10792 of 2018 and
CWP No.11963 of 2018).
Mr. Mohit Nehra, Advocate
for the petitioner (in CWP No.16194 of 2018).
Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Advocate General, Haryana with
Mr. Samarth Sagar, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.
*****
A.B. CHAUDHARI, J
By this common order, all the above three petitions are being
disposed of.
2. The petitioners (in CWP No.10792 of 2018) have made the
1 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 18-02-2019 03:43:44 :::
CWP No.10792 of 2018 (O&M) and other connected petitions -2-
following prayer:-
"(i) issue an appropriate, writ, order or direction especially in
the nature of Certiorari, quashing the impugned notification
dated 9.3.2018, Annexure P-6, issued by respondent No.1,
amending Rule 12.16 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, being
ultra vires and violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the
Constitution of India and also quashing the impugned
advertisement dated 16.4.2018, Annexure P-5, issued by
respondent No.2 qua inserting three conditions, i.e. (i) medium
of examination, (ii) award of five additional marks to the
applicant, father, mother, spouse, brother, sister, son and
daughter is/was/has not been a regular employee in any
Department, Board, Corporation, Company, Statutory Body,
Commission or Authority of Haryana Government or any other
State Government or Government or any other State
Government or Government of India and (iii) award of
additional five marks to the members belonging such a
denotified tribe (Vimukt Jatis and Tapriwas Jatis) or Nomadic
tribe or Haryana which is neither a Scheduled Caste nor a
Backward Class, being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and
unconstitutional as having issued without due application of
judicious mind thereby creating a naked eye discrimination
between the citizens of the same category in flagrant violation
of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India."
3. In support of these writ petitions, learned counsel for the
petitioners in these petitions submits that three provisions mentioned in Rule
12.16 (8 & 9) of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, providing for additional
marks violates Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India and therefore,
these provisions are required to be quashed and after quashing, the selection
process can be undertaken. In the body of the petition and the prayer, the
challenge is to the first provision regarding 'medium of examination'.
2 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 18-02-2019 03:43:45 :::
CWP No.10792 of 2018 (O&M) and other connected petitions -3-
However, learned counsel for the petitioners did not argue on the said
provision and in that place, they argued about the provision of additional 7
marks for candidates with higher education, namely, graduate or
postgraduate degrees. The second provision was regarding provision of 5
additional marks to those whose close relatives are not in regular
Government employment and last provision was award of additional 5 marks
to the members belonging to the denotified tribe (Vimukt Jatis and Tapriwas
Jatis) or Nomadic tribe, who are neither Scheduled Castes nor Backward
Class. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently argued that the first
provision regarding addition of 4 marks for graduates and 3 marks for
postgraduates, is clearly arbitrary and in so far as the candidates who are 18
years old are concerned, they can only pass 12th standard and can, by no
stretch imagination, obtain graduate or postgraduate degrees. In other words,
according to him, the addition of 4 and 3 marks to a candidate, is totally
arbitrary and a candidate of the age of 18 years would be clearly deprived of
such marks and therefore, the said provision violates Articles 14 and 16 of
the Constitution of India.
In so far as the second provision is concerned, they submitted
that the addition of 5 marks to the candidates whose close relatives are not in
Government employment would be given 5 marks, is again arbitrary as the
said provision has no object which can be achieved and is made with a view
to favour such candidates and is in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the
Constitution of India.
As to the third provision, learned counsel for the petitioners
contended that addition of 5 marks for the candidate of denotified tribe
(Vimukt Jatis and Tapriwas Jatis) or Nomadic tribe is again arbitrary
3 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 18-02-2019 03:43:45 :::
CWP No.10792 of 2018 (O&M) and other connected petitions -4-
because for such candidates reservation is already made and therefore, there
cannot be addition of marks resulting into double benefit to them and that
also violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
4. Per contra, Mr. Baldev Raj Mahajan, learned Advocate General,
Haryana vehemently opposed these writ petitions and argued that there is no
merit in these writ petitions. According to him, the Government has applied
its mind and taken a policy decision with a view to help the persons who
have disadvantages in getting Government employment and are socially
backward and unable to obtain any employment. He then submitted that
grant of additional marks is certainly justified because the Government
wants to adopt a humane approach to such candidates in order that deprived
class of people also get an opportunity to get Government employment.
There is nothing wrong with the policy and on the contrary, there is a
benevolent object which is sought to be achieved. He, therefore, prayed for
dismissal of these writ petitions.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the rival parties at length.
The beneficial provisions which are under challenge are as under:-
"12.16 Procedure for direct recruitment:-
........................
(8) Additional qualification: (10% weightage):-
(a) ........................
(b)(i) For Constable- Education (maximum 07 marks):
Candidates with higher education i.e. with
Graduate degree in any stream from a recognized
university shall get four (04) marks, while
candidates with Post Graduate degree in any
stream from a recognized university shall get
additional three (03) marks;
4 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 18-02-2019 03:43:45 :::
CWP No.10792 of 2018 (O&M) and other connected petitions -5-
..................
(9) Miscellaneous (10% weightage):-
(a)(i) Five (05) marks will be given if no person from
amongst the applicant's father, mother, spouse,
brother, sister, son and daughter is/was/has been a
regular employee in any Department, Board,
Corporation, Company, Statutory Body,
Commission or Authority of Haryana Government
or any other State Government or Government of
India.
...................
(iii) Five (05) marks will be given, if the applicant
belongs to such a denotified tribe (Vimukt Jatis and
Tapriwas Jatis) or Nomadic tribe of Haryana which is
neither a Scheduled Caste nor a Backward Class.
..................."
6. At the outset, we find that 4 marks have been provided for a
person who is eventually a degree-holder and in addition, 3 marks are
provided for a person who is having postgraduate degree. It is a known fact
that despite obtaining graduate and postgraduate degrees, the young
educated employed are moving here and there for employment. They are
unable to have employment having obtained graduate and postgraduate
degrees, with great efforts. The Government has decided to add 4 marks for
one who is graduate and in addition 3 marks for one who is postgraduate.
This would certainly be helpful to the Government because of the higher
education of the police constable. It enures to the benefit of State and public
at large regarding the advantage of the higher education qualification and
also the maturity that is obtained having graduate or postgraduate degrees.
We do not find any violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of
5 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 18-02-2019 03:43:45 :::
CWP No.10792 of 2018 (O&M) and other connected petitions -6-
India in this provision, which, on the contrary is beneficial for the
Government as well as for the Society as such.
7. In so far as the second provision is concerned, we again find that
the Government in its wisdom has provided that 5 marks will be added to
such candidate whose no close relative is/was/has been a regular employee
in the Government and so on and so forth. In other words, the provision has
been made with a view to extend benefit of 5 marks to a family member of
such a family who could not even once have a Government employment in
the family and their own life throughout. We really appreciate such a
provision made by the Government of Haryana and would rather praise it as
none of the State in the Country has made such a provision nor recognized
the unfortunate deprivation of any employment in the Government
Departments etc. Thus, this provision is also for the benefit of such
candidates whose no family member or close relative enjoyed the
Government job at any point of time.
8. The third provision under challenge is regarding allotment of 5
marks to denotified tribe (Vimukt Jatis and Tapriwas Jatis) or Nomadic tribe
who are neither Scheduled Castes nor Backward Class. Again as to this
provision, we must appreciate the making of such provision by the
Government of Haryana. It is then known fact that the Scheduled Castes or
Backward Class that is Scheduled Tribe have major chunk of share in the
reservation as against denotified tribe (Vimukt Jatis and Tapriwas Jatis) or
Nomadic tribe. This class of tribe hardly have any representation in the
Government employment as stated earlier, the major reservation goes to
others. It clearly appears to us that keeping in mind the deprivation of
Government employment to such category or tribe throughout must have
6 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 18-02-2019 03:43:45 :::
CWP No.10792 of 2018 (O&M) and other connected petitions -7-
impressed by the Government to provide for additional 5 marks. That apart,
we find that the petitioners not being the candidates belonging to the
reserved category of denotified tribe (Vimukt Jatis and Tapriwas Jatis) or
Nomadic tribe will have no locus standi to put the challenge to the said
provision.
9. We, therefore, find that all the above three provisions do not
violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and therefore, we
repel the arguments about it. On the contrary, we find that the Government
of Haryana in its wisdom understood the plight of the graduates and
postgraduates, those families who has never seen any Government
employment and the members belonging to denotified tribe (Vimukt Jatis
and Tapriwas Jatis) or Nomadic tribe who could hardly get any Government
employment. We must appreciate the wisdom with which the State of
Haryana has made these provisions.
10. In the result, we find no merit in these writ petitions and hence,
we make the following order:-
ORDER
(i) CWP No.10792 of 2018, CWP No.11963 of 2018 and CWP No.16194 of 2018 are dismissed;
(ii) No order as to costs.
(A.B. CHAUDHARI) JUDGE (H.S. MADAAN) JUDGE December 07, 2018 mahavir Whether speaking/ reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No 7 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 18-02-2019 03:43:45 :::