Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 4268 (PNJ)

Suresh Kumar v. State Of Haryana

2018-10-31

RITU BAHRI

body2018
JUDGMENT Ritu Bahri, J. - In the present civil writ petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of order dated 06.05.2015 (Annexure P-23) whereby the request of the petitioner for selection to Group-B post has been declined by respondent No. 2. 2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner is an eminent player of International Kabaddi Team of India and is permanent resident of Haryana. The date of birth of petitioner is 19.04.1971 while that of respondent No. 5 is 30.09.1970. The petitioner had won four gold medals in International Kabaddi Championship, held at Colombo, Sri Lanka from 28.04.2000 to 30.04.2000 (Annexure P-3). Further the petitioner had won gold medal in 9th SAF games held at Islamabad, Pakistan from 29.03.2004 to 08.04.2004 (Annexure P4). Subsequently the petitioner won various medals and participated in many competitions, as per Annexure P-5 to Annexure P-7. Petitioner was also honoured with Rajiv Gandhi Award on 20.08.2007 for his outstanding contribution to Kabaddi (Annexure P-8). Petitioner had also completed the diploma course in Sports Coaching from July, 2007 to May, 2008 in Kho-Kho/Kabaddi from Sports Authority of India, Netaji Subhas Sourthern Centre, Banglore (Annexure P-9). In the year 2009, the Government of Haryana farmed a Sports policy-2009 to pass the benefits to eminent sports person and there is nothing mentioned about age limit for selection of sport persons under this policy (Annexure P-10). Accordingly, the petitioner applied for a suitable job as per his eligibility on 21.12.2013, as per Sports Policy-2009 (Annexure P-11) 3. The petitioner sent various reminders, applications etc for suitable job (Annexure P-12 to P-15). Thereafter, Government of Haryana made some amendments and a new sports policy as per notification dated 20.08.2013 has been announced and the petitioner was fully eligible as per this policy as well. The Sports Policy-2014 is annexed as Annexure P16. The petitioner filed RTI for providing details of appointments made under the sports policy of Government of Haryana (Annexure P-17). The petitioner then again forwarded application dated 24.08.2014 to the Chief Secretary, Government of Haryana for suitable job (Annexure P-18). In reply to Annexure P-16, vide letter dated 17.09.2014, names and details of 42 sports persons appointed had been provided (Annexure P-19). A legal notice dated 05.11.2014 was then sent by the petitioner to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 by registered post. 4. In reply to Annexure P-16, vide letter dated 17.09.2014, names and details of 42 sports persons appointed had been provided (Annexure P-19). A legal notice dated 05.11.2014 was then sent by the petitioner to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 by registered post. 4. When no action was taken by the respondents, the petitioner filed CWP No. 507-2015 which was disposed of by this Court on 11.11.2014 to decide the legal notice filed by the petitioner (Annexure P-21). However, vide order dated 06.05.2015 (Annexure P-23), respondent No. 2 denied to consider the claim of the petitioner on the ground that he does not fulfill the requisite condition of age as per instruction dated 26.08.2014. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the date of birth of petitioner is 19.04.1971 while that of respondent No. 5 is 30.09.1970 and the petitioner has forwarded his application for Government job on 21.12.2013 and thereafter, reminders dated 19.02.2014, 11.04.2014 and 14.07.2014 has been given by the petitioner. Thereafter, the Government of Haryana has made some amendments in sports policy, as per notification dated 20.08.2013 and the petitioner was eligible in that sports policy as well, which has been implemented by the Haryana Government as Sports Policy, 2014 but despite this fact, the petitioner was not selected. Thereafter, CWP No. 507 of 2015 was filed by the petitioner, which was disposed of by this Court on 13.01.2015 by giving a direction to respondent No. 2 to decide the legal notice dated 11.11.2014 (P-21) but the claim of the petitioner was denied giving the reason that he does not fulfill the requisite condition of age, as per instruction dated 26.08.2014. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that once respondent No. 5 who is elder to the petitioner has been selected under the same Sports Policy, the petitioner is also entitled to the same benefit. Further in Sports Policy-2014, there is no mention of age bar. 7. Learned counsel further contends that respondent No. 3 has been given job against Group-B post with Sports Department despite the fact that the petitioner and respondent No. 3 were the participant of the same Indian Kabaddi Team (Gold Medal Winner) in 15th Asian Games held from 1st to 5th December, 2006 at Doha, Qatar. Petitioner was senior to respondent No. 3, who has secured just one Gold Medal to his credit. Petitioner was senior to respondent No. 3, who has secured just one Gold Medal to his credit. Similarly respondent No. 4 has also been offered job on a Group B post in the Police Department, who had only secured one Gold Medal to his credit. Respondent No. 5 who had secured one Bronze Medal in Para Asian Games Dec, 2010 held at China and whose date of birth is 30.09.1970 has been granted job on 11.03.2014 as Junior Coach in Sports and Youth Affairs Department in Group C category at the age of 43 years 05 months 11 days without any request or sanction for age relaxation. 8. Learned counsel contends that there is nothing mentioned about the age limit/bar in the Sports Policy 2009 or Sports Policy 2014. 9. On the other hand, learned State counsel while referring to instructions dated 26.08.2014 contends that the maximum age limit for applying Government Job was 40 years whereas the petitioner was above 40 years on 21.12.2013 and thus he had not applied in time and he cannot held responsible to the respondent for his own mistake. Further the petitioner had been given cash award of Rs. 10 lakhs for his achievement in Asian Games- 2006, as per Sports Policy, 2009. 10. Further it has been submitted that respondent No. 5 was given the job of Assistant Coach vide order dated 01.03.2013 after taking relaxation in age from the then Hon'ble the Chief Minister, Haryana (Annexure R-1). The case of the petitioner was put up in the meeting of Chief Secretary Haryana on 04.01.2016 on the agenda of providing job to the outstanding sports persons but the same was rejected. 11. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 4 stated that respondent N o. 4 participated in the 9th Asian Kabaddi Championship held in December, 2005 in Tehran, Iran and was member of India International Kabaddi Team at the 16th Asian Games, 2010 held at Guangzhou from November 12-27, 2010 and won the gold medal. Respondent no. 11. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 4 stated that respondent N o. 4 participated in the 9th Asian Kabaddi Championship held in December, 2005 in Tehran, Iran and was member of India International Kabaddi Team at the 16th Asian Games, 2010 held at Guangzhou from November 12-27, 2010 and won the gold medal. Respondent no. 4 participated in many events and learned counsel for respondent No. 4 states that as per Annexure AA under heading (Awards and incentives for Sports-persons, Coaches and referees) under Haryana Government Sports Policy, 2014 (Annexure P-14), for providing out of turn appointment to sports medal winners in Group A, B or C post, a criteria has been fixed and as per the criteria in sub para (iv) of para 'c' of policy provides that only sports achievements after 05.03.2005 of the players will be considered for appointment. Thus, keeping in view the education qualification, age criteria, as per government instructions and sports achievements, respondent No. 4 was appointed on Group B post. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to notification dated 05.09.2018 of Haryana Government (Sports and Youth Affairs Department wherein upper age limit for job has been extended to 50 years. 13. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 14. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the only ground for rejecting the claim of the petitioner was that he was over age as the date of birth of petitioner is 19.04.1971 and thus he is more than 40 years of age and was not squarely covered under the Government instructions. Now Sports Policy, 2014 is required to be examined by this Court (Annexure P- 16). The petitioner was given cash prize of Rs. 10 lacs as per Sports Policy, 2009. In the sports policy, 2014, there is no mentioned of age bar and it has been stated in the policy that the medal winners in sports will be provided jobs in the departments of Home, Sports and Youth Affairs, School Education and Development and Panchayats, which have vital role in promotion of sports in the State. 15. In the present cases, the petitioner had applied for job on 21.12.2013, as per his eligibility under the Sports Policy, 2009 (Annexure P-11) and thereafter, he sent various reminders. 15. In the present cases, the petitioner had applied for job on 21.12.2013, as per his eligibility under the Sports Policy, 2009 (Annexure P-11) and thereafter, he sent various reminders. The petitioner then came to know that some other team mates had been selected and then he sought information under RTI Act vide Annexure P-17 and accordingly, he received incomplete information on 17.09.2014 (Annexure P-19). The petitioner was fully eligible to be appointed, as his other team mates have also been appointed and his case has only been rejected that he was above 40 years of age on 21.12.2013. Further the petitioner had won four gold medals in Kabaddi in International Kabaddi Championship and this fact is not mentioned in the impugned order and it has been stated that the petitioner had participated in the Kabaddi team of 2006 Asian Games. However, in the written statement filed by the respondents they had admitted that the petitioner had won four gold medals in Kabaddi in International Kabaddi Championship. In reply to para No. 18 of the petition, respondent-State admitted that petitioner and respondent No. 3 were the participant of the same Indian Kabaddi team who won gold medal in 15th Asian Games. Respondent No. 3 was granted job on Group B post as he fulfilled the requisite conditions including age. Respondent No. 4 was provided job by the policy department. Respondent No. 5 was given relaxation of age while giving job after the approval of the then Hon'ble Chief Minister. 16. Now once as per notification dated 05.09.2018 issued by Haryana Government (Sports and Youth Affairs Department, the upper age limit for job has been extended to 50 years, the petitioner can also be extended the benefit of the same by granting him job, treating him at par with Vikas Kumar and Sonu Narwal. 17. The argument of learned State counsel that the instructions dated 05.09.2018 is prospective in nature is also rejected as object of these instructions is to give benefit to Sports person who had won many medals for India and made India proud. 18. In view of the discussion made above, the present writ petition is allowed and order dated 06.05.2015 (Annexure P-23) is set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to Group B post. 18. In view of the discussion made above, the present writ petition is allowed and order dated 06.05.2015 (Annexure P-23) is set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to Group B post. This exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.