Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Chh) 431

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Narendra Kumar Vyas, J.
Roopesh Kumar S/o Gopal Prasad and ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Home (Police) and ors. – Respondents
WPS No. 4378 of 2023, WPS No. 273 of 2024, WPS No. 3336 of 2023, WPS No. 3342 of 2023, WPS No. 3343 of 2023, WPS No. 3349 of 2023, WPS No. 3353 of 2023, WPS No. 3355 of 2023, WPS No. 3377 of 2023, WPS No. 3381 of 2023, WPS No. 3384 of 2023, WPS No. 3389 of 2023, WPS No. 3392 of 2023, WPS No. 3393 of 2023, WPS No. 3394 of 2023, WPS No. 3395 of 2023, WPS No. 3409 of 2023, WPS No. 3428 of 2023, WPS No. 3434 of 2023, WPS No. 3461 of 2023, WPS No. 3546 of 2023, WPS No. 3547 of 2023, WPS No. 3549 of 2023, WPS No. 3629 of 2023, WPS No. 3657 of 2023, WPS No. 3750 of 2023, WPS No. 4142 of 2023, WPS No. 4149 of 2023, WPS No. 4166 of 2023, WPS No. 4229 of 2023, WPS No. 4232 of 2023, WPS No. 4296 of 2023, WPS No. 4302 of 2023, WPS No. 4305 of 2023, WPS No. 4307 of 2023, WPS No. 4309 of 2023, WPS No. 4310 of 2023, WPS No. 4311 of 2023, WPS No. 4312 of 2023, WPS No. 4314 of 2023, WPS No. 4318 of 2023, WPS No. 4333 of 2023, WPS No. 4341 of 2023, WPS No. 4389 of 2023, WPS No. 4400 of 2023, WPS No. 4404 of 2023, WPS No. 4410 of 2023, WPS No. 4414 of 2023, WPS No. 4418 of 2023, WPS No. 4433 of 2023, WPS No. 4438 of 2023, WPS No. 4471 of 2023, WPS No. 4480 of 2023, WPS No. 4483 of 2023, WPS No. 4519 of 2023, WPS No. 4523 of 2023, WPS No. 4527 of 2023, WPS No. 4532 of 2023, WPS No. 4554 of 2023, WPS No. 4560 of 2023, WPS No. 4564 of 2023, WPS No. 4572 of 2023, WPS No. 4573 of 2023, WPS No. 4583 of 2023, WPS No. 4636 of 2023, WPS No. 4638 of 2023, WPS No. 4644 of 2023, WPS No. 4672 of 2023, WPS No. 4706 of 2023, WPS No. 4711 of 2023, WPS No. 4721 of 2023, WPS No. 4726 of 2023, WPS No. 4743 of 2023, WPS No. 4749 of 2023, WPS No. 4752 of 2023, WPS No. 4753 of 2023, WPS No. 4754 of 2023, WPS No. 4755 of 2023, WPS No. 4756 of 2023, WPS No. 4762 of 2023, WPS No. 4763 of 2023, WPS No. 4765 of 2023, WPS No. 4778 of 2023, WPS No. 4791 of 2023, WPS No. 4808 of 2023, WPS No. 4815 of 2023, WPS No. 4818 of 2023, WPS No. 4825 of 2023, WPS No. 4829 of 2023, WPS No. 4958 of 2023, WPS No. 4968 of 2023, WPS No. 4993 of 2023, WPS No. 5018 of 2023, WPS No. 5051 of 2023, WPS No. 5055 of 2023, WPS No. 5059 of 2023, WPS No. 5147 of 2023, WPS No. 5157 of 2023, WPS No. 5164 of 2023, WPS No. 5200 of 2023, WPS No. 5285 of 2023, WPS No. 5343 of 2023, WPS No. 5361 of 2023, WPS No. 5363 of 2023, WPS No. 5460 of 2023, WPS No. 5663 of 2023, WPS No. 5692 of 2023, WPS No. 5864 of 2023, WPS No. 5866 of 2023, WPS No. 5956 of 2023, WPS No. 5970 of 2023, WPS No. 6141 of 2023, WPS No. 7056 of 2023, WPS No. 8515 of 2023, WPS No. 8722 of 2023, WPS No. 8723 of 2023, WPS No. 8724 of 2023, WPS No. 8725 of 2023, WPS No. 8733 of 2023, WPS No. 8735 of 2023, WPS No. 8755 of 2023, WPS No. 8757 of 2023, WPS No. 8758 of 2023, WPS No. 8761 of 2023, WPS No. 8782 of 2023
Decided On : 20-05-2024

Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. Khulesh Sahu and Mr. Sabyasachi Bhaduri, Mr. Abhishek Sinha, Sr. Advocate along with Ms. Shristi Upadhyay, Mr. Shalvik Tiwari, Mr. Harshal Chouhan, Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Mr. Tarendra Kumar Jha along with Mr. Tapan K. Chandra and Mr. Deepak Kushwaha, Mr. Rahul Sharma, Ms. Supriya Upasane, Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Mr. Janu Khare, Mr. Nitansh Kumar Jaiswal, Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Mr. Rakesh Kumar Manikpuri along with Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, Mr. Anadi Sharma, appers through video conferencing, Ms. Durga Mehar on behalf of Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Mr. Nishi Kant Sinha, Ms. Swati Verma, Mr. Curtis Colloins, Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Mr. Vivek Verma, Mr. Amit Kumar Sharma along with Ms. Mamta Mahilange, Mr. R.K. Verma, Mr. Sanjay Patel, Kaushal Yadav, Ms. Sareena Khan, Mr. Paras Mani Shrivastava, Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Mr. P. Acharya, Mr. Govind Prasad Dewangan, Mr. Ashutosh Dwivedi, Mr. Amit Kumar Sharma, Mr. Sushil Sahu, Mr. Vinod Kumar Pandey, Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocates
For the Respondent:Mr. Ramakant Mishra, D.S.G. along with Ms. Anmol Sharma, Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, Ms. Jyoti Singh, Mr. Neraj Baghel, Mr. Rishabh Singh Deo, Central Government Counsel, Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vivek Sharma, Addl. Advocate General, Mr. Avinash Singh and Mr. Avinash Tiwari, Advocates Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, Abhishek Chandra Gupta, Ms. Ayushi Agrawal, Mr. Shobit Koshta, Mr. Amiya Bhushan, Ms. Swati Verma, Mr. Ravi Bhagat along with Mr. Manas Vajpai, Mr. Byas Narayan Sahu, Mr. Sunil Otwani, Advocates

The court upheld that the recruitment rules prohibit women from the post of Platoon Commander, finding the inclusion of excess female candidates unconstitutional and ordering adjustments to the selection process.

Headnote:(A) Chhattisgarh Police Executive (Non-Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2021 - Rule 6(8)(ii), Rule 6(10)(iv) - Reservation for women candidates - Recruitment process for 975 posts in Police Department challenged - Court held that women are not eligible for post of Platoon Commander, and inclusion of women candidates in the merit list was illegal as per the rules - Direction issued to call additional 370 male candidates for selection while quashing inclusion of excess women candidates. (Paras 4, 60, 68, 69)

(B) Recruitment and Selection Process - Candidates participating without objection cannot later challenge the process if unsuccessful - Judicial review of selection processes is generally limited to established violations or malfeasance. (Paras 66-67)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners challenge recruitment procedures issued on 17.09.2021, arguing for proper application of gender reservations and merit list fairness for Police positions, specifically contesting the inclusion of female candidates for the Platoon Commander role.

Findings of Court:
The Court confirmed the illegality in calling women candidates for the Platoon Commander post, directed adjustment in the selection process to include 370 male candidates instead.

Issues: The key issues included the legality of female participation for Platoon Commander posts and the overall integrity of the recruitment process.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized adherence to recruitment rules that explicitly prohibit women for the Platoon Commander position, and affirmed that participating candidates cannot later contest the recruitment's validity.

Result: Writ petitions dismissed with directions.

Table of Content
1. common grounds of challenge in police recruitment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. issues surrounding eligibility for female candidates. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. claims regarding violations of recruitment rules. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. the court's findings on discrepancies in the selection process. (Para 60 , 61)
5. dismissal of the writ petitions with directives. (Para 68 , 69)

JUDGMENT :

1. Since an identical issue, common facts of law are involved and common grounds of challenge have been raised in the bunch of these writ petitions they are heard analogously and are being decided by this common order.

2. The petitioners in the bunch of petitions have challenged the recruitment procedure initiated by the State for appointment in various posts in the Police Department. WP(S) No. 4378/2023 in case of Roopesh Kumar and others vs. State of CG has been taken up as lead case. The grounds of the challenges made by the petitioners and relief sought by them, in brief are as under:-

3. WP(S) No. 4378/2023, WP(S) No. 3343/2023, WP(S) No. 3384/2023, WP(S) No. 3395/2023, WP(S) No. 3750/2023, WP(S) No. 4142/2023, WP(S) No. 4149/2023, WP(S) No. 4229/2023, WP(S) No. 4232/2023, WP(S) No. 4296/2023, WP(S) No. 4302/2023, WP(S) No. 4305/2023, WP(S) No. 4307/2023, WP(S) No. 4309/2023, WP(S) No. 4310/2023, WP(S) No. 4312/2023, WP(S) No. 4318/2023, WP(S) No. 4333/2023, WP(S) No. 4400/2023, WP(S) No. 4404/2023, WP(S) No. 4414/2023, WP(S) No. 4418/2023, WP(S) No. 4433/2023, WP(S) No. 4471/2023, WP(S) No. 4480/2023, WP(S) No. 4519/2023, WP(S) No. 4554/2023, WP(S) No. 4560/2023, WP(S) No. 4564/2023 WP(S) No. 4572/2023, WP(S) No. 4573/2023, WP(S) No. 4583/2023, WP(S) No. 4636/2023, WP(S) No. 4644/2023, WP(S) No. 4711/2023, WP(S) No. 4721/2023, WP(S) No. 4726/2023, WP(S) No. 4743/2023, WP(S) No. 4749/2023, WP(S) No. 4752/2023, WP(S) No. 4754/2023, WP(S) No. 4755/2023, WP(S) No. 4756/2023, WP(S) No. 4763/2023, WP(S) No. 4765/2023, WP(S) No. 4778/2023, WP(S) No. 4808/2023, WP(S) No. 4815/2023, WP(S) No. 4818/2023, WP(S) No. 4825/2023, WP(S) No. 4958/2023, WP(S) No. 4968/2023, WP(S) No. 4993/2023, WP(S) No. 5018/2023, WP(S) No. 5055/2023, WP(S) No. 5059/2023, WP(S) No. 5157/2023, WP(S) No. 5164/2023, WP(S) No. 5200/2023, WP(S) No. 5285/2023, WP(S) No. 5343/2023, WP(S) No. 5361/2023, WP(S) No. 5363/2023, WP(S) No. 5460/2023, WP(S) No. 5692/2023, WP(S) No. 5956/2023, WP(S) No. 5970/2023, WP(S) No. 6141/2023, WP(S) No. 7056/2023

4. In these bunch of petitions the contention of the petitioners, in brief is that the respondent Department has issued an advertisement on 17.09.2021 for recruitment of 975 posts of Subedar, Platoon Commander and Sub-Inspector (special Branch) /(Fingerprints)/(questioned documents) and Sub-Inspector (Computer and Radio). Out of these, 247 posts were earmarked for platoon commanders. In the advertisement as well as in the Chhattisgarh Police Executive (Non-Gazatted) Service Recruitment Ruels, 2021 (hereinafter referred to as (“The 2021 Rules”) it has been clearly mentioned that women candidates are not entitled to be appointed on the post of Plantoon Commnader. As per the advertisement and Rules of 2021 the candidates have to undergo four stages of examination i.e. prelims, mains, physical test and interview. The Rule 13 of the Rules 2021 provides that final list for direct recruitment shall be prepared on the basis of marks obtained in mains written examination, physical proficiency test, interview and bonus marks. The advertisement further provides that the candidates working on the post of constable in the Police Department and those having requisite educational qualifications could also apply for these posts. The preliminary examination was conducted on 29.01.2023.

5. It has been contended that the recruitment process is governed by the Chhattisgarh Police Executive (Non-Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2021 and Rule 6(8) provide

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Chh) 431

The court upheld that the recruitment rules prohibit women from the post of Platoon Commander, finding the inclusion of excess female candidates unconstitutional and ordering adjustments to the selection process.

Cases Referred (15)

Related Judgments

Roopesh Kumar S/o Gopal Prasad VS State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Home (Police) - 2024 Supreme(Chh) 431

JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA VS PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 8624

Bijoy Basumatary S/o Late Paresh Ch. Basumatary VS State of Assam - 2021 Supreme(Gau) 342

Siddharth Sharma S/o Sh. Shshil Kumar VS State Of Himachal Pradesh - 2022 Supreme(HP) 54

Anil Kumar Sanwaria VS Speaker, Lok Sabha - 2023 Supreme(Del) 4885

Sweta Sinha Vs. The District and Sessions Judge Madhubani - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 13418

SWATI MEHRA AND ORS vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS - 2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 78405

PRIYANKA DAM vs WBSEDCL AND ORS. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 11977

Sudhir Kumar Gupta vs The State of Bihar through the Director General of Police - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 315

PUNEET KUMAR GUPTA & ANR. Vs DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD (DSSSB) & ORS. - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6046