- (1.) Through the present petition, the petitioners seeks quashing of advertisement dated 01.08.2012 (Annexure P-5) to the extent of it making physically handicapped persons ineligible. A direction is also sought to be issued to the respondents to appoint the petitioners as Jail Warders or any other equivalent post. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the record with their assistance, the relevant facts, which have emerged are that through an advertisement issued in the year 1995, 703 posts of Constables were advertised, in pursuance to which, the petitioners, amongst others, applied for consideration of their candidature. After the selection process, 1600 persons including the petitioners were appointed. However, on a challenge made to the entire selection through C. W. P. No. 13942 of 1995, through an order of this Court dated 16.02.1996, the same was set aside.
(2.) The aforesaid order of this Court was challenged through a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Apex Court, which was dismissed through order dated 17.01.2001 and as a result thereof, the services of all the 1600 appointees including the petitioners were terminated. The Constables, whose services had been terminated then represented to the Government for being adjusted/accommodated against any other post and apparently, on their representation, the Government made amendments to the Punjab Jails Department State Service (Class-III Executive) Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) making them eligible to be appointed as Jail Warders. As per the amended eligibility, the impugned advertisement was issued, through which, applications were invited for appointment of Jail Warders. It is the common case of the parties that in the selection held, in pursuance to the impugned advertisement, many of the terminated Constables were appointed, but so far as the petitioners are concerned, since prior to the issuance of the impugned advertisement, they had incurred 82% and 100% disability and the impugned advertisement debarred physically handicapped persons from being considered, they were not considered for appointment. It is in these circumstances that the petitioners have filed the present petition for the reliefs, as referred to earlier.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that many of the other Constables, whose services had been terminated along with the petitioners, had been adjusted through the impugned advertisement after amendment to the Rules, which was tailor-made for them and only for the reason that in the meanwhile, the petitioners had incurred physical disability, they cannot be discriminated. It was further submitted that if the petitioners could not be appointed on the posts of Jail Warders, they should be accommodated on some other posts. Learned counsel further cited the examples of other persons, who, even with certain physical disabilities, had been appointed through the impugned advertisement and thus, prayed for parity.;