Commissioner of Police v. Pawan Singh

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner concedes to the fact that the posts of enrolled, subordinate and other officers in Delhi Police are civil posts under the Union of India. Learned counsel further concedes that the,Ex-Servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Service & Posts) Rules, 1g7g'issued by the lJnion of India would apply to appointments in Delhi police. Leamed counsel further concedes that the said Rule exclude from,h W.P.(C) Nos.5430/13 & 5494113 Page I of[3] 2013:DHC:7239-DB "i f. ) the definition of Ex-Servicemen, persons who have worked in any paramilitary force and that only those who have worked on combatized posts or non-combatized posts in the Army, Navy and Air Force are required to be treated as Ex-Servicemen.

2. Thus the only issue which we have to decide is whether the Tribunal has correctly held that once a field is occupied by a Rule the same cannot be re-occupied by an executive instruction. The answer is obvious. It cannot be.

3. The rationale for 'Ex-Servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Service & Posts) Rules, 1979'is that enrolled, enlisted junior commissioned officers and commissioned officers in the three wings of the army retire fairly young. For example, the jawans retire on attaining the age of 38 years. These people can be re-employed against civil posts. But, the jawans and officers of the Central Paramilitary Forces superannuate at the age of 60 years and hence do not rcquire any reernployment venues.

4. Counsel for the petitioner states that keeping in view the threat perception in Delhi, the Delhi Police needs people well-versed in commando training and thus the Delhi Govetnment took a decision to extend benefit of employment to Ex-Servicemen serving in special forces such as NSG or Special Action Group.

5. Now, if the requirement of Delhi Police is special we see no reason why it cannot make a request to the Central Government i.e. through the Ministry of Home Affairs, which is the cadre controlling authority of Delhi Police to amend the definition of Ex-Servicemen in the 'Ex-.l t' Servicemen (Re-employment in Central Civil Service & Posts) Rules, 1979'.

6. It is settled law that if a W.P.(C) Nos.5430/13 & s494l13 Rule or a Statute occupies a teritory, Page 2 of[3] h whatever may be the want or a desire, action has to conform to the Rule or the statute. If with passage of time a Rule or a statute warrants a change, law recognizes the right in the competent authority to amend the same. But the competent authority cannot say that it will live by the old Rule but act contrary to it because it need has changed.

7. Both writ petitions are dismissed in limine' CM No.1212512013 in W.P.(C) No'5430/2013 CM No.1224512013 in W.P.(C) No'5494/2013 ( Dismissed as infructuous. / -^-:f,T PRADEEP NANDRAIOG, J. hr ntI wl'|.%'

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. rD ) ocToBER 23, 2013 ilranil0 W.P.(C) Nos.5430/13 &, s494113 Page 3 of[3]