J.V. Gupta, J. - (1.) This order will dispose of Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 2912, 2965, 3091, 3004 and 3105 of 1979, as common question of law is involved in these petitions.
(2.) Facts of each Writ Petition are almost common with the exception 1 hat they have arisen from different districts in Punjab. In one case brief facts as stated in Civil Writ Petition No. 2912 of 1979 are that the petitioners are working as constables in the Punjab Police District Faridkot. Before a constable is promoted to the post of a Head Constable, his name is' required to be brought on List 'B- I under the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 Thereinafter referred to as the Rules) For doing so, a test is held every year in the month of Jan. in each District in accordance with Rule 13.7 read with Rule 19-14 of the Rules by a Committee constituted under the rules The Constables who obtain highest position are brought on List B-1' Subsequently, a requisite number out of them are sent for Lower School Course to Police Training College, Phillaur, in two batches. the first batch is sent on April I and the 2nd on Oct. 1, each year. The test for bringing the constables on List 'B 1 'in Faridkot District was held in Jan., 1979. The petitioners alongwith other persons appeared in the test' and claim to have qualified the same. Since 14 seats were allotted to District Faridkot, only 14 names out of the persons qualified were brought on List ' B-I'.
(3.) Further it is averred that in May, 1979 it was felt that more constables have to be promoted as Head Constables, and, therefore, a large number of persons needed to be deputed for the course, and with that purpose in view, a test in law and parade for selection of eligible countable for inclusion of their names in List 'B- l' was to be held on 5th, 6th and 7th Sept., 1979, in Police Lines, Faridkot, vide Annexure 'P-3 with the writ petition. The constables disirous to appear in that test were required to give their names by 25th Aug., 1979. The petitioners further stated that since the had already qualified in the test held in Jan., 1979, they have a right to be sent for the course and cannot be forced to compete with those persons who had appeared with the petitioners and failed. According to them, the action of the respondents in holding a fresh test is totally contrary to the Rules and cannot be sustained. In the writ petition this action of the respondents has been challenged on various grounds, inter alia:- (i) That the action is violative of the provisions of Rule 13.7 . (ii) That the action is also contrary to the provisions of Rule 19.14 ; (iii) That the action is also violative of Art. 16. because inspite of the fact that the petitioners are fully qualified and have passed the test, they are not being deputed for the course, and are on the contrary forced to appear in the test with the persons who had already appeared with them and failed, and (iv) That though under Rule 13.21 the Inspector-General of Police has the powers to relax the operation of certain rules appearing in Chapter 1J, no order has been passed by him under the said rule;