JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, J.

1. The present petition have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the vires of a particular part of the Leading Fireman (Fire and Emergency Services) (Group C) Recruitment (Amendment) Rules 2013 (hereinafter called the Rules of 2013). The basic contention of the petitioners is that the impugned provision is not in line or at par with their counterpart holding the equivalent post of Head Constable in the Recruitment Rules governing such Head Constables. The petitioners contend that their scope of induction to the post of Leading Fireman has become less favourable by the Amendment and the same is starkly discernible from the Rules of equivalent employment such as Head Constables.

2. Before going to the impugned part of the Rules, the background facts of the case may be stated in the following manner.

3. The petitioners (26 in numbers) have joined together in the present writ petition. It is the case of the petitioners that they were recruited as Fireman in the year of 2007 under the Arunachal Pradesh Police Department and have been working in the said capacity without any blemish. In the meantime, all the petitioners have duly completed the Sub-Fire Officers Course in service. The Arunachal Pradesh Police has different organizational branches like APP Civil Police, APPBN, IRBN and the Fire and Emergency Services. The petitioners contend that the post in which they were initially appointed i.e. Fireman is equivalent to that of Constable and Leading Fireman which is the next promotional post from Fireman is equivalent to the post of Head Constable in the other branch of the Police Department. As per the existing Recruitment Rules namely “Leading Fireman (Group C) Recruitment (Amendment) Rules 2007” the post of Leading Fireman was to be filled up by hundred percent promotions from Fireman. However, it is the contention of the petitioners that as per the impugned Rules of 2013, promotion from Fireman to Leading Fireman has been prescribed by way of 50% by promotion and 50% by Fast Track Promotion on merit through a limited departmental examination. The petitioners contend that juxtapositioned, so far as similar promotion from Constable to Head Constable, the old Recruitment Rules namely “The Head Constable (Civil), (Group C), Non-Gazetted, Non-Ministerial) Recruitment Rules of 2010” prescribed the mode of promotion as 60% by promotion and 40% by Fast Track Promotion through a limited departmental examination. However, in the new Recruitment Rules for Head Constable i.e. Head Constable (General Duty), Arunachal Pradesh Police, (Civil Police/AAPBN/IRBN), (Group C) Non-Gazette, Non-Ministerial Recruitment Rules of 2015 provides for filling up of the post of Head Constable from Constable at the ratio of 90% by promotion and 10% by limited departmental examination.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that against the alleged discrimination, they had submitted a number of representations before the concerned authorities which were not paid any heed to. On the other hand, it appeared that the authorities had taken steps to go ahead with the impugned Amended Rules of 2013. Under such situation, the petitioners had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P. (C) No. 314/2020. The said writ petition was however disposed of vide order dated 17.11.2020 directing the respondent authorities to consider and dispose of the representations of the petitioners within 19.11.2020.

5. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction of this Court, it appears that the representations were considered and disposed of vide order dated 23.11.2020 rejecting the prayer of the petitioners. The petitioners have accordingly filed the present petition questioning the vires of the impugned Amendment as well as for setting aside the order dated 23.11.2020.

6. We have heard Shri L. Perme, learned counsel for the petitioners whereas the State respondents are represented by the learned Senior Government Advocate, Shri S.