Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(P&H) 684

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Rajbir Sehrawat , J.
Aditya Marwaha & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Punjab & Ors. - Respondents
CWP No. 2 of 2017 (O&M), CWP No. 27488 of 2016, CWP No. 27494 of 2016 (O&M), CWP No. 321 of 2017, CWP No. 899 of 2017, CWP No. 13746 of 2017, CWP No. 13868 of 2017
Decided On : 22-01-2021

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Balram Singh, Advocate, Dr. Rau P.S.Girwar, Advocate, Mr. Raj Kumar Rana, Advocate, Mr. Rohit Ahuja, Advocate, Mr. R.D.Rattewal, Advocate, Mr. B. S. Icchewal, Advocate, Mr. Gaurav Chopra, Advocate, for the Appellant, Mr. Gagneshwar Walia, Advocate, for the Respondent.

The dropping of the driving proficiency test during the recruitment process was justified and sustainable in law, as it did not introduce any inequality or prejudice to the candidates.

Headnote:
Driving Proficiency Test - Recruitment Criteria - Punjab Police Act, 2007 - Section 4(d), Section 45(g) - Summary of the judgment: The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging the dropping of the driving proficiency test during the recruitment process for Male Constable (Drivers) in Punjab Police. The court found that the dropping of the test was justified and sustainable in law, as it was considered a superfluous exercise and did not introduce any inequality or prejudice to the candidates. The court also directed the authorities to reconsider the issue of driving licenses for candidates whose licenses were found to be for Motor Cars/Tractors/Jeeps, in view of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. Additionally, the court directed the respondents to consider the petitioners in the waiting list for appointment against vacant posts.
Fact of the Case:

The writ petitions challenged the corrigendum issued by the State authority, which dropped the requirement of the driving proficiency test during the recruitment process for Male Constable (Drivers) in Punjab Police. The petitioners alleged that the dropping of the test and subsequent appointments were illegal and in violation of the Model Code of Conduct.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the dropping of the driving proficiency test was justified and sustainable in law, as it did not introduce any inequality or prejudice to the candidates. The court also directed the authorities to reconsider the issue of driving licenses for candidates and to consider the petitioners in the waiting list for appointment against vacant posts.
Issues: The main issues included the legality of dropping the driving proficiency test, the validity of driving licenses, and the consideration of candidates in the waiting list for appointment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the dropping of the driving proficiency test did not introduce any inequality or prejudice to the candidates and was justified. The court also directed the authorities to reconsider the issue of driving licenses for candidates and to consider the petitioners in the waiting list for appointment against vacant posts.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging the dropping of the driving proficiency test and directed the authorities to reconsider the issue of driving licenses for candidates and to consider the petitioners in the waiting list for appointment against vacant posts.

ORDER

Rajbir Sehrawat, J. (Oral). - This order shall dispose of a bunch of writ petitions as entioned below:

CWP No.27488 of 2016, CWP No.2 of 2017, CWP No.321 of 2017, CWP No.899 of 2017, CWP No.14394 of 2017, CWP No.16004of 2017, CWP No.18116 of 2017, CWP No.2138 of 2018, CWP No.14423 of 2018, CWP No.4558 of 2019, CWP No.6529 of 2019, CWP No.7279 of 2019 and CWP No.11678 of 2019 are challenging the corrigendum dated 20.12.2016, published on 24.12.2016 (Annexure P-5) whereby the criteria of selection for the post of Male Constable (Drivers) in Punjab Police, was modified, as well as, the consequent selection.

CWP No.27494 of 2016, CWP No.13746 of 2017, CWP No.13868 of 2017, CWP No.13869 of 2017, CWP No.13899 of 2017, CWP No.24971 of 2017, CWP No.26440 of 2017, CWP No.4364 of 2018, CWP No.4363 of 2018, CWP No.4914 of 2018, CWP No.5250 of 2018, have arisen as a consequence of action taken by the authorities pursuant to the interim order dated 17.01.2017 passed by this court in CWP No.27494 of 2016, whereby the Police Department had revoked the orders of appointment, since those were alleged to be in violation of the interim order.

CWP No.28624 of 2018, CWP No.543 of 2019 and CWP No.5146 of 2020 are challenging the order of termination of services on account of license of the petitioners not being found to be either in conformity with the requirement prescribed in the advertisement or the driving license having been found fake, or issued after the cut-off date fixed in the advertisement or non-existent as such.

Still further CWP No.26973 of 2017, CWP No.12995 of 2018 and CWP No.12942 of 2019 have been filed claiming appointment to the posts which have been left vacant during the process of selection, asserting that these petitioners are in waiting list prepared by the respondents and that the petitioners are entitled to be considered for appointment against such vacant posts

2. The common facts as involved in the present case and as leaded in CWP No.2 of 2017 are that the respondents had issued an advertisement dated 15.10.2016 for recruitment to 750 vacancies of Male Constable (Drivers) in the District Police cadre of the Punjab Police. The said advertisement is attached as Annexure P-l with petition. The advertisement prescribed the educational qualification to be 10+2 pass. Besides this the possession of driving license for Light Motor Vehicle (LMV), was also required. The said advertisement was based upon the standing order No. 12 of 2016 issued by the Director General of Police (DGP), Punjab, exercising powers under Section 4 (d) and Section 45 (g) of the Punjab Police Act, 2007. The said standing order is annexed with the petition at Annexure P-2. For ready reference, the main provisions of the advertisement concerning the present case are reproduced herein-below.

"5. Driving License

The candidates must have a valid Driving License for LMV/LMV-NT/Heavy Motor Vehicle at the time of applying for the post. He will be required to upload the scanned copy of the original Driving License while filling up the Online Application Form, failing which he would be barred from taking the Test.

6. SELECTION PROCESS

Regional Recruitment Boards shall conduct the recruitments for male candidates at such Recruitment Centres as specified by the Chairman Central Recruitment Boards. The Substance Abuse(Drug Addiction) Test (SAT), Physical Screening Test (PST) and Physical Measurement Test (PMT) shall be conducted at such centres as may be decided. The Substance Abuse (Drug Addiction) Test (SAT), the Physical Screening Test (PST) and the Physical Measurement Test (PMT) of a candidate shall be conducted on a single day, and the entire process shall be got video-graphed. After the qualifying the above said test the Board will conduct written test which is of 50 marks. From the candidates who qualify the written examination, double the number of vacancies advertised will be called for Driving proficiency test according to the merit of written examination. T

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2021 Supreme(P&H) 684

The dropping of the driving proficiency test during the recruitment process was justified and sustainable in law, as it did not introduce any inequality or prejudice to the candidates.

Cases Referred (2)