RAJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order dtd. 17/5/2018 whereby their juniors have been treated seniors as Head Constables in Haryana Armed Police.

(2.) The respondent as per Rule 13.7 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (as applicable to State of Haryana) (for short 'PPR') in 2014 conducted B-1 test of eligible Constables for promotion to the post of Head Constables. 150 Constables had to be deputed for Lower School Course (for short 'LSC') which is a promotional course. The State Government issued notification dtd. 15/5/2015 whereby 20% seats were ordered to be allocated to Scheduled Caste Constables. The said notification came to be challenged before this Court in CWP-11073-2015. This Court by interim orders stayed implementation of said notification. The respondent again conducted B-1 test of 2015 Batch. In the said Batch, 150 Constables had to be selected for LSC. The private respondents participated in B-1 test of 2014. Their name figured beyond Serial No.120. The respondent as per its notification dtd. 15/5/2015 deputed 120 Constables from 2014 for LSC. 30 seats were retained. On account of interim order passed by this Court, the respondent sought opinion of office of Advocate General which opined that candidates beyond Serial No.120 may be deputed for LSC as there is stay on implementation of notification dtd. 15/5/2015. Few of the private respondents despite being passed in B-1 test of 2014, participated in B-1 test of 2015 Batch. In view of interim orders of this Court passed in CWP-11073-2015 as well as opinion of office of Advocate General, the respondent reconsidered status of private respondents VIS-A-VIS 30 meritorious candidates of 2014. The respondent deputed them for LSC against 2014 Batch.

(3.) The petitioners are claiming that they participated in B-1 test of 2014 or 2015 Batch. There are three petitioners. Two had participated in the Batch of 2015 and one had participated in 2014 Batch. The private respondents were permitted to undergo LSC subsequent to completion of LSC by them. As they completed LSC prior to private respondents, they should be treated senior whereas respondent has arbitrarily made them senior.