The main legal point established in the judgment is that circulars issued by the General Administration Department have precedence over circulars issued by the police department in determining age relaxation for government posts.

Sujoy Paul, J.

In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for the post of Constable (GD).

2. Briefly stated the relevant facts are that petitioner submitted his candidature for the post of Constable (GD) pursuant to the advertisement (Annexure P-1). Before submission of candidature, petitioner has already rendered 3 years and 11 month's service as Constable in department of Home Guards (M.P). The core issue is as to whether petitioner is entitled to get age relaxation upto the age of 40 years. This is not in dispute between the parties that the candidates are entitled to get age relaxation to the extent they have rendered services as Volunteer in Home Guard subject to maximum of eight years. In the present case, the petitioner has rendered three years and 11 months services in the said department and, therefore, he is not entitled to get age relaxation for the aforesaid period subject to maximum age limit. The point of controversy is as to which provision relating to age relaxation will apply. Shri Dhagat, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is entitled to get age relaxation as per GAD circular dated 24/02/1987 (Annexure R-2) and GAD circular dated 4th June, 2010 (Annexure R-3). Shri Dhagat by taking this Court to the said circulars contended that said circulars are issued to all the departments including police department of Government of M.P. Circular (Annexure R-3) dated 4th June, 2010 was circulated to police units by DGP (Selection). He relied on circular dated 4th June, 2010 to contend that earlier circulars on the subject were superseded by this circular. It was made clear that maximum age relaxation would be upto 40 years (for UR category). He submits that in view of the GAD circular, the earlier GOP dated 02/04/1987 (Annexure R-1) has lost its shine. Shri Dhagat also relied on additional documents to show that under the RTI Act, petitioner was informed by the police department that aforesaid GAD circulars are applicable and circulated to the entire police department.

3. Shri Giresh Kekre, learned G.A advanced two fold contentions. Firstly, it is submitted that circular of GAD dated 24/02/1987 (Annexure R-2) and circular (Annexure R-3) dated 4th June, 2010 are general circulars which did not deal with the specific post of Constable. Whereas, GOP No.78/92 dated 02/04/1997 (Annexure R-1) is specifically issued for selection for the post of Constable. Thus the special provision will prevail over the general provision. Secondly, Shri Kekre submits that full form of GOP is Gazetted Orders of Police. By taking this Court to Regulation 973 of M.P Police Regulations, it is submitted that said notification is published in consonance and as mandated in Regulation 973. Thus, GOP has statutory force and colour. Hence, it will prevail over the instructions issued by GAD on executive fiat.

4. In view of the diametrically opposite stand taken by the parties on the question of applicability of governing provision, the spinal issue needs to be decided in this case is as to which provision would apply for the purpose of determining the eligibility and age relaxation of the petitioner. Parties confined their arguments on the aforesaid points.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. I deem it proper, to first deal with the second contention of learned Government Advocate. Mr. Kekre, who has contended that GOP dated 02.04.1987 (Annexure-R-1) is published in Police Gazette. Hence, it has a statutory backing and colour as per regulation 973 of Police Regulations. This argument on the first blush appears to be very attractive. Regulation 973 provides that two gazettes can be published by Police Department, viz., (1) the M.P. Police Gazette and (2) the M.P. Criminal Intelligence Gazette. The Clause (a) provides the details of the police gazette. Section II pr