SURAJ BHAN Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Oral) - The petitioners who are four in number, are working as Constables in the Haryana Police in District Panipat. They had not been deputed for the Lower School Training Course. According to the averments made in Para 8 of the writ petition, they filed writ petition Nos. 17076 of 1991, 15239 of 1991 and 16801 of 1991, in this Court. All these petitions along with a bunch of other petitions were decided by a Division Bench of this court on 13.3.1992 and judgment was rendered in C.W.P. No. 8097 of 1991. The controversy which was raised before the Division Bench was the interpretation of Rule 13.7 of the Punjab Police Rules (as applicable to Haryana) (in short called 'Rules') Rule 13.7 reads as under:-

(2.) The point for determination before the Division Bench was whether assessment of service record as envisaged by Rule 13.7(4) constitute a 'Test'. The case of the petitioners before the Division Bench was that assessment of service record did constitute a 'Test' and further Rule 13.7 was bad inasmuch as no maximum marks were provided under the said sub-rule. The stand of the State was that assessment of service record is not a 'test', therefore, the question of providing any maximum marks for the same did not arise. According to the State, it was only for parade, written test and interview that 50% marks in each were required as it was only these three items which constituted 'test'.

(3.) The Division Bench held that assessment of service record under sub-rule 13.7(4) did constitute a 'test' and consequently 50% marks were required in this test also as envisaged by Rule 13.7(4). Further, it was held that maximum marks should be provided under Rule 13.7(4). The operative portion of the judgment of the Division Bench dated 13.3.1992 reads as under:-