Dismissed

Ram Kumar Bodla v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Jan 2010CWP/16929/1989

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dealt with a writ petition by a candidate classified as over-age at the time of his medical examination for the post of Constable. The Court accorded effect to the Punjab Police Rules which mandate age calculation at the date of enrollment. Finding the petitioner inadmissible, the writ was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to depute the petitioner for training was denied and the petition was dismissed as wholly without merit.

Ram Kumar Bodla Vs State of Haryana… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CWP No. 16929 of 1989. Date of Decision: 13.1.2010

Ram Kumar Bodla

.. Petitioner

VS.

The State of Haryana & Ors.

¶9

.. Respondents.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR,

¶11

Present:Mr. Ravinder Malik, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

**Mr. K.C. Gupta, Sr. DAG Haryana. *****

¶13

ARVIND KUMAR, J.

¶14

The petitioner underwent the physical test as well as interview between 20.8.1989 to 22.8.1989, pursuant to an advertisement made for filling up the vacancies of Constables in District Kurukshetra, in the State of Haryana. He stood at Sr. No.167 in the list while the vacancies were 160 and thus, was kept in the waiting list.

¶15

Since more vacancies were allocated to the Kurukshetra District, the Government started exhausting the list of candidates in waiting. As per pleadings, the candidate at Sr. No.166 in the waiting list was medically examined as per Rule 12.16 of the Punjab Police Rules. The petitioner was also medical examined as per Rules on 20.10.1989 but was not assigned the enrolment number because by that time he had completed the age of 27 years being born of 4.10.1962 and thus, was not enrolled being over-age. He was not granted relaxation by the competent authority, leading to the institution of present writ petition invoking the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court, as enshrined under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking direction to the respondents to depute the petitioner for training to Madhuban as recruitted Constable.

¶16

In the reply filed on behalf of the respondents, the prayer made by the petitioner has been opposed. It has been contended that as per Rules,

¶17

¶18

a candidate must not be above the age of 27 years at the time of enrollment and the age at the time of selection is irrelevant. Since after the enrollment of candidate at Sr. No.166, the process is initiated for the enrollment of the petitioner, his age was calculated and was found over-age and thus, accordingly he was not assigned enrollment number.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the paper book carefully.

¶20

As per rule 12.15 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (hereinafter referred to as Rules, for brevity), no person shall be appointed to the post of Constable by direct recruitment who is less than 18 years or more than 27 years of age and as per the prevailing provisions at that time, the age has to be taken into account from the date of enrollment. Further perusal of Rule 12.16 makes it clear that no right to be enrolled shall be accrued to a candidate only on the basis of selection but subject to the compliance of other requisites like medical examination prior to being enrolled and as such age has to be calculated while reckoning the date of enrollment as a criteria. In the instant case, admittedly, as per Annexure P-1 the petitioner was medically examined on 20.10.1989, the date on which he had crossed the age of 27 years. Thus, it cannot be said that the action of the respondents in not enrolling the petitioner, being over-age, is either illegal or perverse. The petition being wholly without merit is dismissed.

¶21

(ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE

¶22

January 13,2010 Jiten

Ram Kumar Bodla v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Kumar Bodla v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurdev Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Gurdhian Singh Vs Karnail Singh

Yogesh Kumar Vs Narender Kumar Tayagi and Anr.

Krishan Gopal Vs the State of Haryana

Chander Rekha Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Ashok Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.