R.S. Mongia, J. - (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:- "13.7(1) list B (in form 13.7) shall be maintained by each Superintendent of Police. It shall include the names of all constables elected for admission of the Lower School Course to be held at the Police Training College. Selection to the list shall be made in the month of January each year and shall be limited to the number of seats allotted to the District for the year. For reasons to be recorded, the number of seats can be increased by twenty per cent. Allotment of seats to each district shall be done on the basis of existing vacancies and the number of vacancies which are likely to occur during the next one year. Names shall be entered in the list in the order of merit, determined by the Departmental Promotion Committee on the basis of tests in (i) Parade (ii) Written test in general law (Indian Penal Code, Cr. P.C., Indian Evidence Act and such other local and Special Laws as may be specified (iii) Interview and (iv) Examination of Service Record. (2) xx xx xx (3) Departmental Promotion Committee for each district shall consist of District Superintendent of Police and two Deputy Superintendents of Police to be named by the D.I.G. concerned. The candidates will have to obtain at least 50 per cent of the marks in each test. The maximum marks for each test shall be prescribed by the Inspector-General through a Standing Order, which may be reviewed after every three years. (4) The assessment of service record will be done on the basis of education, courses passed and, Commendation Certificates earned during the service. The marks assigned to these shall be as follows,:- JUDGEMENT_127_LAWS(P&H)1_1993(1).html
(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:- "In our considered view, the ends of justice would be amply met if the respondents are directed to fix the maximum marks for the examination of service record and prepare the merit list afresh. In the eventuality of any of the petitioners found entitled to admission on merit, they would be detailed for the course whenever next course commences by creating additional seats. If any of the petitioners who has been left out and has not been sent to the course, commenced on 1.12.1991 is later found entitled for being detailed for the course, in view of the observations made above, he would be entitled to all the consequential reliefs like seniority etc. and would be deemed to have qualified the course commencing from 1.12.1991 along with other candidates. Any person who has been detailed to the course but on reframing of the selection list on merit is found to be not qualified or entitled for the course, would not be sent back as no relief can be granted against him because he is not a party to the writ petition and he would be permitted to continue with the course. In view of our above observations the judgment in CWP No. 12238 of 1991 ( Zile Singh v. State of Haryana and others, 1992(1) SCT 614 (P&H) ) decided on 20.12.1991, is overruled to the extent it held that interview and examination of the service record is not a test. With the above observations the writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. We hope, in future the State would first provide the maximum marks for each test and then make the selections.";