JUDGMENT :

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J.

1. As common issues are involved in the captioned petitions, with the consent of both sides, the same are hereby disposed of by this common order. For the sake of brevity and convenience, facts are borrowed from CWP No.28754 of 2022.

2. The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order dated 12.09.2022 (Annexure P-14) whereby respondent has rejected their claim for regularization.

3. The State Government in 2004 accorded permission to fill up 819 posts of Constables in Haryana Armed Police. 815 candidates were declared successful by Recruitment Board. 61 candidates were issued appointment letter, however, remaining could not be issued because of effectuating of Model Code of Conduct for Assembly Elections. In 2005 to allay apprehension of illegalities expressed by different quarters, the State Government decided to conduct inquiry with respect to selection of 815 Constables in Haryana Armed Police. In the inquiry, it was found that selection of candidates was made contrary to Rules and Regulations. The Government decided to cancel selection of all the candidates including those who had already joined service. Successful candidates filed writ petitions before this Court which came to be dismissed. They preferred Intra Court Appeal which further came to be dismissed. In 2017, State Government vide order dated 29.06.2017 decided to engage 100 Special Police Officers out of Ex-Serviceman of Army, Ex-Constables of disbanded Haryana State Industrial Security Force and Haryana Armed Police (2004 batch). The petitioners were selected as Constables in 2004 in Haryana Armed Police and their selection, as afore-stated, was cancelled, thus, they formed corpus for the selection of Special Police Officers as per order dated 29.06.2017 of the State Government. The respondent issued enrollment letter to the petitioners and they joined service in August’ 2017. It is apt to mention here that few petitioners of connected petitions joined service in 2016 and they were not appointed pursuant to aforesaid letter dated 29.06.2017. The petitioners are working as Special Police Officers since August’ 2017. The respondent time and again has extended their tenure of service. Lastly, their tenure was extended upto 30.06.2027 vide memo dated 12.11.2024. The said memo reads as: -

The Director General of Police,
Haryana, Panchkula
Memo No.7/16/2016-3HGI
Dated, Chandigarh 12.11.2024

Subject:- Sanction for continuation of 11,000
Special Police Officer (SPOs) in Police
Department.

Reference your letter no.6852/Acctts-2 dated 26.06.2024 and no.9376/Acctss-2 dated 13.09.2024 on the subject noted above. 

2. After careful consideration of the matter, Government has decided to grant approval to your proposal for continuation of 11,000 Special Police Officers (SPOs) coterminous upto 30.06.2027. For those 9,000 (4500+4500) SPOs extension has already been granted by the Government vide letters even no. dated 07/12.03.2024 and 07.08.2024, extension is further granted upto 30.06.2027. For the rest of 2,000 SPOs extension is granted for a period from 15.08.2024 to 30.06.2027.

Sd/-

Superintendent-cum-Section Officer, Home
for Additional Chief Secretary to Govt. Haryana,
Home Department”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners are getting lumpsum salary of Rs.20,000/- per month. They are discharging duties of ordinary police officers. They have same powers, privileges and amenities and liable to same duties and responsibilities as an ordinary police officer, however, they are paid meager amount of Rs.20,000/- per month which is less than even paid to Home Guard Volunteers. They were appointed in terms of Section 21 of Haryana Police Act, 2007 (for short ‘2007 Act’) and have undergone prescribed training. They are working at par with Constables. Neither a Constable can be Investigating Officer nor are they, thus, for all intents and purposes, they are performing dut