RESURGENCE INDIA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed in public interest is unique for the plenitude of the prayers made in the same. It raises numerous issues for the determination of this Court in as many as 12 distinct prayers made in para 16 (i) to 16(xii) of the petition. All these prayers are aimed at achieving the daunting task of finding solutions for the ills that plague the police administration in this Country by invoking the extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court in the present proceedings. It accuses the respondents of non compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, 1997 1 RCR(Cri) 372 and blatant breach of the service rules relating to police force by posting non- cadre officers against cadre posts. It also alleges discriminatory and unfair treatment to officers of the Indian Police Service in the matter of transfers and postings and abuse of the man power in the lower echelons of the police force on account of their deployment as domestic help/orderlies with police officers. It finds fault with the creation and continuance of additional Police Districts and posting of non professional police officials at cutting edge level of the force. Failure of the Police Department to deal effectively with issues relating to traffic management by use of modern technology and its failure to formulate a long term strategy/planning is also sought to be highlighted by the petitioner. Non implementation of the reports of the National Police Commission, Padmanabhaiah Committee on Police Reforms and other Committees is yet another dimension which this petition encompasses apart from highlighting other deficiencies in the Police Department including alleged corruption in recruitment to the force. Inadequacy of scientific equipment and gadgetry and the alleged miseries, which the constabulary faces while serving in hostile and arduous working conditions is also one of the issues raised by the petitioner. For facility of reference and better appreciation of the wide range of issues raised by the petitioner as also for showing how prolific can a petitioner be in making prayers in a writ petition, it would be useful to extract the prayer part of the writ petition in the petitioner's own words :-

(2.) When this petition came up for hearing before us on 6th November, 2008, Mr. APS Shergill sought time to enumerate the specific points that he proposed to urge in support of the petition, in order to show how the present writ petition could be maintained even when the Supreme Court was already seized of the matter concerning reforms in Police Force. Mr. Shergill has accordingly enumerated in writing the issues that according to him need to be adjudicated upon by this Court in the present proceedings. What is note worthy is that instead of limiting the issues to manageable dimensions, the summary filed by Mr.Shergill has added to what has already been stated in the prayer part of the writ petition, extracted above. The summary filed by Mr. Shergill has enumerated as many as 28 different aspects that according to the petitioner, need to be examined by this Court.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. Issues relating to reforms in the Police Force and Police Administration have often engaged the attention of the experts and even come under Judicial scrutiny. It was only because of the need for reforms in the working of the Police as an effective instrument of good governance, maintenance of law and order and for upholding the rule of law in the Country that the Government have at different times appointed Commissions and Committees comprising experts on the subject to evolve a wholesome revamp of the Police Force in the Country, if necessary by bringing about suitable changes in the Legislations on the subject. Mr.Shergill has enumerated in writing the issues that are being dealt with by Supreme Court in Parkash Singh and others v. Union of India, 2006 4 RCR(Cri) 439 Writ Petition (Civil) No. 310 of 1996 and in Mithila Kumar v. Government of U.P., Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 68 of 2008 and those that according to the petitioner-Association need to be examined in the present writ proceedings. The issues that are being dealt with in Parkash Singh's case have been identified as under :-