UMESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have approached this Court praying for granting them the benefit of fixation of their seniority under 35% quota in view of the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No. 7952 of 2004 Naresh Kumar v. State of Haryana and others, decided on 5.11.2004. It is the contention of the petitioners that they became eligible for deputing them to the Lower School Course in the year 2002, both under the 55% quota and 35% quota. Claim of the petitioners for deputing them to the Lower School Course was considered only under 55% quota and their claim under the 35% quota was not considered on the ground that they were below the age of 35 years. This according to the counsel for the petitioners, is not in accordance with Rule 3.17 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, as applicable to State of Haryana (hereinafter referred to as 1934 Rules'). He, accordingly, contends that deputing the petitioners at a subsequent date and accordingly fixing their seniority below the persons who would be junior to them because of their non-deputing to the Course, is not in accordance with law and, therefore, they are entitled to fixation of their seniority at an appropriate place by treating them to be deputed to undergo the Lower School Course in the 2002 batch when their juniors were deputed as such.

(2.) Counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the petitioners were not eligible for being deputed under the 35% quota meant for seniority-cum-fitness in the list B-I for the year 2002, being below 35 years of age and this quota of 35% is meant for those constables who are above the age of 35 years and fulfil the other qualifications as specified in Rule 3.17 of the 1934 Rules. He contends that the petitioners have rightly been deputed in the respective years and have been granted the enlistment accordingly.

(3.) I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the records of the case.