| Headnote |
Punjab Police Rules, 1934, Rule 12.14. (3) constitutional validity of-Authorising the grant of preference of appointment in favour of sons and near relatives of persons serving in the police service, whether-Constitutional-Constitution of India, 1950, Articles 16(2) and Article 14(1). Delhi Police (Appointment and Recruitment) Rules, 1980, Whether supersedes the earlier Punjab Police Rules, 1934, though it is deemed to be in force by virtue of section 149(2) of the Delhi Police Act, 1978--Construction of a New law. Delhi Police Act, 1978, sections 147 and 149--Scope and effect of, explained-Rules 30 and 32 of the 1980 Police Rules. The Delhi Police Act, 1978 (Act 34/78) which came into force with effect from 1.7.1978 by virtue of section 149 thereof repealed the earlier Act of 1861. However, the first proviso to section 149(1) provided that all rules and standing Orders (including the Punjab Police Roles, as in force in Delhi) made under the Police Act, 1861 would be in so far as they were consistent with the Act may be deemed to have been respectively made under the Act. Consequently the said 1934 Rules continued to be in force even after the commencement of the Act. By virtue of the authority vested under section 147(2)(a) of the 1978 Act, the Lt. Governor of Delhi promulgated the Delhi Police (Appointment and Recruitment) Rules, 1980. The said Rules which came into effect from 31.12.80 were amended twice-in 1983 and 1985. By the newly added Rule 32 on 2.5.83, all provisions contained in the Punjab Police Rules as applicable to the Union Territory of Delhi were-repealed. While under the earlier Rule 12: 14 (3) of the Punjab Police Rules, sons and near relatives of persons who have done good service in Punjab Police or in the Army had preference in recruitment, under the new Rule 9(vi)(d)(ii) relaxation of the age limit alone was provided for "for sons of police personnel who die in service". Despite this Rule position, the Deputy Commissioner of Police Headquarters (I), Delhi, by bis order dt. 3.10.81, relaxed the rules relating to the qualifications in favour of the sons or wards of Delhi Policemen upto the limit of 7'h% of the total selection. Accordingly the police authorities in charge of the selection of candidates recommended 259 candidates out of a total of 420 candidates who came within the category of wards of Policemen/Class IV employees to the Delhi Administration for seeking approval of the competent authority.All the 23 appellants were eligible to be considered for the appointment as Constables In the light of the order of relaxation dated 3.10.81, but even they were not sent up for training which they had to undergo before the appointment because six of them were found to be ineligible since their brothers had already been recruited in the Police Department by relaxing the rules of appointment in their favour of them were refused permission to join the training course on the ground that the Administrator (Lt. Governor of Union territory of Delhi) bad not relaxed the qualifications in their cases. Two of them, however, had in fact received a letter stating that the Administrator (Lt. Governor of the Union territory of Delhi) had accorded sanction for relaxation for recruitment in their cases and they could join the training course with effect from 15.6.1982 but later on they were also denied admission into the Police force because their brothers had been recruited earlier in the Delhi Police service after according relaxation. The order of relaxation in their favour had, therefore, been withdrawn. The appellants who were thus aggrieved by the denial of admission into the service prefer- , red the writ petition in the High Court for the issue of writ of mandamus to the Delhi Administration to appoint them as Constables on the ground that they satisfied the qualifications prescribed by the rules read with the order of relaxation related 3.10.1981.A learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court allowed the writ petition and held that the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 continued to remain in force even after the promulgation of the Rules which came into force on 31.12.1980 and the cases of the appellants were protected by the relaxation order dated 3.10.1981 issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police and the fact that any of the brothers of the appellants had been appointed earlier under the cover of similar order of relaxation did not disentitle the appellants to claim the benefit of the order of relaxation. Aggrieved by the said decision, the Union of India and the Delhi Administration filed a Letters Patent Appeal. The appeal was allowed holding; (a) that on the promulgation of the Rules with effect from 31. 12.1980, rule 12.14.(3) of the Punjab Police· Rules, 1934 which dealt with the subject of appointment of Constables stood repealed; (b) that H under Rule 30 of the Rules tile power to relax the Rules in appropriate cases having been vested with the Administrator (Lt. Governor of the A Union territory of Delhi) the order of relaxation issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Police on 3.10.1981 did not give any right to the appellants for enlistment as Constables unless relaxation was granted by the competent authority i.e. the Administrator (Lt. Governor of the Union territory of Delhi) and the mere fact that a candidate was successful in the test by itself would not give him a right to enlistment; (c) that since by its letter dated April 3, 1982 the Delhi Administration had decided that only one son of a police officer would be considered for grant of such relaxation the appellants whose brothers had already been employed in the police service on the basis of an earlier order of relaxation were not entitled to be recruited by relaxing the Rules once again, Hence the appeal by special leave. |
