RAMESH CHANDRA NAUTIYAL Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) V. K. Gupta, C. J. By this common judgment, all the three appeals are being disposed of together.

(2.) LEARNED Single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petitions because the advertisement condition clearly stated that such candidates, who in the course of medical examination were found to be colour blind, are not eligible for be ing appointed. It is no doubt true that the appellants/writ petitioners had quali fied the recruitment process at almost all stages but at the stage of medical ex amination it was discovered that they are partially colourblind.

(3.) LEARNED Single Judge while tak ing note of this submission has clearly held that 1942 Rules do not apply with respect to the recruitment of constables. We ourselves also find that 1942 Rules are applicable only to U. P. Police Serv ice, which has been defined as the State Service Class II as per Rule 2 and Rule 3 (1 ). Rule 4 specifically lays down that the strength of the Service shall be as given in Appendix A and in Appendix A undoubtedly it is stated that the Service shall comprise of Additional Superin tendents of Police in two different grades of pay. It therefore clearly means that 1942 Rules are not applicable nor can these be attracted to the Recruitment or appointment of Constables.