BALBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in the instant writ petition is to the order dated 29.9.2011, Annexure P14, whereby the claim of the petitioner for appointment as Constable in District Patiala under the Freedom Fighters Category has been rejected. Brief facts leading to the filing of the instant writ petition are that the State of Punjab issued advertisement in the year 2010 for appointment of 1214 posts of Male Constables in the District Police Cadre, Punjab, Annexure P2. Likewise, an advertisement was also issued in the same very year for recruitment of 1533 Male Constables in the Armed Police Cadre, Annexure P3. In both the advertisements, the break -up of the posts District -wise had been furnished. Apart from providing reservation for other categories, there was one percent reservation for wards of Freedom Fighters i.e. son and grand -son of Freedom Fighter. The selection was to be made at the level of District Recruitment Board and the Selection process was to comprise of three phases i.e. Physical Measurement, Physical Efficiency Test and Interview. The merit of the candidates was to be drawn on the basis of the total marks obtained in the educational qualifications, height and interview.

(2.) THE petitioner is a ward of a Freedom Fighter and had applied for the post of Constable under the Freedom Fighter category in response to both the advertisements for Patiala District i.e. for District Police Cadre and Armed Police Cadre. The District Recruitment Board for Patiala District entertained the application of the petitioner on account of his being eligible and he even cleared the physical test and, accordingly, was called for the interview on 19.6.2010. It is pleaded that the result as regards District Police Cadre, Male Constable (Patiala District) was published on 10.7.2010, Annexure P6. As per such public notice, the result of all the categories including General Category, SC, BC etc. pertaining to District Patiala was declared, but insofar as Freedom Fighters Category, the same was withheld. Likewise, the result of Armed Police Cadre, Male Constable of Patiala District, was published on 29.9.2010 at Annexure P7, but herein also, the result of Freedom Fighters Category was withheld.

(3.) UPON notice of motion having been issued, a joint written statement has been filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3. Respondent No. 4 who, otherwise, belongs to Sangrur District and has been appointed under the Freedom Fighters Category in Patiala District and whose appointment is also a subject matter of challenge in the instant writ petition, has also filed a written statement, which was duly taken on record.