Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurbir Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 12 November, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
****
109 CWP-30916-2025
Date of Decision: 12.11.2025
GURBIR SINGH ...Petitioner
Vs.
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ...Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present:- Mr. Nikhil Sabharwal, Advocate
for the petitioner
Mr. Aman Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab
***
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles
226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order
dated 26.09.2025 whereby his representation to count his deputation
period for service benefits including seniority has been denied.
2. The petitioner was selected as Sub-Inspector in Railway
Protection Force. He joined service on 28.11.1998. He was sent on
deputation to Punjab Police on 01.01.2009. He was absorbed in Punjab
Police on 15.07.2011. He was promoted as Inspector on 31.12.2017. He
filed representation dated 29.07.2024 seeking counting of his deputation
period towards his seniority as counted in the case of others. The
respondent has rejected his representation. The petitioner claims that he is
not claiming that he should be considered as absorbed from the date of
deputation whereas he is claiming that his period of deputation be
1 of 4
counted in the length of service for seniority.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that case of
petitioner is squarely covered by judgment dated 15.05.2024 of this Court
in 'Balwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others', CWP No.15480 of
2001. There are many officials including Ms. Amrit Brar, IPS, Inspector
Jasgit Singh Sohal and Mr. Balwinder Singh who have been granted
claimed benefit, thus, on the ground of parity, petitioner deserves claimed
benefit.
4. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that petitioner was
absorbed in 2011. He at the time of absorption filed affidavit to the effect
that he would not claim seniority. He preferred CWP-20557-2015 before
this Court claiming benefit of seniority. The same was withdrawn
through a duly sworn affidavit. A period of 14 years from the date of
absorption and 6 years from the date of withdrawal of earlier petition has
passed away. The benefit to three persons pointed out by petitioner was
granted under peculiar circumstances. In Balwinder Singh (supra), this
Court granted benefit because he had already retired.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record of the case.
6. From the perusal of record, it is evident that petitioner joined
Railway Protection Force in November' 1998. He was sent on deputation
to Punjab Police on 01.01.2009. On completion of two years' service, he
could be absorbed in Punjab Police. The competent authority ordered to
absorb him. At the time of absorption, the petitioner filed an affidavit to
the effect that he would not claim seniority. He preferred CWP-20557-
2 of 4
2015 before this Court claiming seniority. The said petition was
dismissed as withdrawn. He filed affidavit before this Court for
withdrawal of writ petition. It was unconditional withdrawal. No liberty
was granted to file fresh petition. A period of 14 years from the date of
cause of action and 6 years from the date of withdrawal of earlier petition
has passed away. Claim of petitioner is prejudiced by doctrine of
constructive res judicata as well as delay and laches.
7. The petitioner was absorbed as per Rule 12.43 of Punjab
Police Rules, 1934. Said rule reads as:-
"12.43. Absorption of Non-Gazetted Officers and other
ranks of para-military forces and other Police forces in
the Punjab Police.- (1) If the Director General of Police
so desires he may with the prior concurrence of the parent
Department, order absorption in the Punjab Police of
Non-Gazetted Officers and other ranks of para-military
forces and other Police forces who have been working as
such in the Punjab Police already on deputation for a
minimum period of two years:
Provided that absorption so made shall not exceed 0.5 per
cent of the total cadre posts in the ranks of Constables and
Head Constables and 0.5 per cent of the cadre posts of
Assistant Sub-Inspectors and Inspectors meant for direct
recruitment and 0.5 per cent of the cadre posts of Sub-
Inspectors.
(2) The non-gazetted officers and other ranks absorbed in
terms of the provisions of sub-rule (1) will be placed junior
to all the persons working in the respective cadres of the
Punjab Police on the date of such absorption, subject
however, to the condition that the basic pay they are
getting in their parent department will be protected.
Explanation.- For the purpose of rule 12.43 the term
"Para Military Forces" means the para military forces
3 of 4
under the administrative control of Government of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs."
From the perusal of sub-Rule (2), it is evident that on
absorption, officer is placed junior to all the persons working in the
respective cadre. If petitioner is granted claimed seniority, it would be
contrary to mandate of aforesaid Rule. Court cannot pass any order
which is patently contrary to Rules. In the case of Balwinder Singh
(supra), he had already retired and no officer was going to be affected
either in monetary terms or from seniority point of view. In the instant
case, petitioner is in service and if he is granted seniority, it may
adversely affect future prospects of many officials.
8. There is another aspect of the matter. The petitioner filed
affidavit at the time of absorption. If claimed seniority is granted, it
would be contrary to his affidavit. The said affidavit cannot be ignored.
9. In the wake of above discussion and findings, this Court is of
the considered opinion that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed
and accordingly dismissed.
10. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL)
JUDGE
November 12, 2025
Deepak DPA
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
