JAGDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB ETC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court impugning the order dated 18.05.2012 (Annexure P-7), vide which the relaxation granted to the petitioner for appointment as Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police in his educational qualifications has been withdrawn, which has resulted in discharge of the petitioner from service.

(2.) It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner applied in pursuance to the advertisement dated 29.07.2007. Petitioner was found to be a person who shall be an asset for the Punjab Police due to his outstanding sports achievements. Exercising the power of relaxation, as was provided in the department itself as also the Standing Order No. 3/2007 dated 11.07.2007 (Annexure P-1), the Inspector General of Police, who was the Chairman of the Committee, recommended his appointment by granting him relaxation in his educational qualifications. The Director General of Police, Punjab accepted the recommendation of the committee and accordingly, passed order dated 20.03.2008 (Annexure P-4). In pursuance thereto, the petitioner stood appointed to the post of an Assistant Sub-Inspector and was continuing as such.

(3.) It so happened that apart from the petitioner, who was appointed as an Assistant Sub-Inspector, there were other Constables also appointed under the Sports Category. The appointment of the Constables was challenged in CWP No. 2564 of 2008 titled as Gurveer Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others, wherein the power to grant relaxation was challenged on the ground that there can be no relaxation for educational qualifications under the statutory Rules and the relaxation, if any, could be granted it was to the limited extent as provided under Rule 12.15 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. This contention of the petitioner was accepted by this Court vide judgment dated 02.02.2010 (Annexure P- 5) holding therein that only relaxation, which was permissible, was for the physical measurements etc. but there could be no relaxation in the educational qualification prescribed under the statutory Rules for appointment to the post. Petitioner admittedly, did not possess the requisite educational qualifications for appointment to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector as he was not a Graduate on the relevant date. In the light of an observation made by the Court in the said judgment where it was observed that the relaxation dehors the Rules cannot be granted and although the other beneficiaries are not a party before the Court but their claims will be dealt with in the light of the observations made in the said judgment.