In a recent judgment, the Allahabad High Court clarified that Village Policemen, also known as Gram Prahari, cannot be considered equal to regular police or Home Guards in terms of pay or service conditions.
The Court, led by Justice J.J. Munir, observed:
“The most essential trapping of a whole-time employment is the continuous obligation of the employee... It does not leave the employee free to pursue alternative avocations... It is not so for the Village Policemen.”
Read Also:- Karnataka High Court Quashes FIR Against Youth for Reselling IPL Tickets
The petition was filed by 1,487 Village Policemen, seeking parity in pay with regular police officers, citing constitutional violations under Articles 14 and 23. They argued that they performed regular duties like surveillance, vigilance, and reporting under police regulations but received only an honorarium of ₹2500 per month.
The petitioners relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Home Guards Welfare Association v. State of Himachal Pradesh, where Home Guards were granted minimum pay equivalent to police personnel. However, the High Court held:
“The Village Policemen were installed as 'the third eye' in the days gone by... not being part of a regular Force, even enrolled as part of a Force like the Home Guards, the two cannot be equated.”
The Court also noted that Village Policemen do not have defined working hours, and unlike Home Guards, they are free to pursue other jobs such as farming or business. Their roles, mainly watch and ward, have become outdated due to technological and administrative advancements. Many functions they once held—like reporting births and deaths or tracking criminals—are now handled by modern policing systems and local bodies like Gram Panchayats.
Referring to the limited nature of their duties, the Court remarked:
“The role of the Village Policemen may be there, but all that the Court has been apprised with, it seems rudimentary.”
Read Also:- Karnataka High Court Orders Police to Register Complaint in ₹1.03 Crore ISRO Job Scam Case
The Court further clarified that while occasional deployment alongside police occurs, this does not constitute regular or full-time employment. Therefore, the claim for minimum pay equivalent to regular police staff or Home Guards was dismissed.
Nonetheless, the Court urged the State:
“...to consider enacting a legislation to make the post of Village Policemen ‘effective and vibrant in contemporary times.’”
In conclusion, the Allahabad High Court disposed of the writ without granting relief, reinforcing that policy and financial decisions fall within the government's domain unless a clear constitutional violation occurs.
Case Title: Lavkush Tiwari and 1486 Others v. The State of U.P. and 2 Others [WRIT - A No. - 18956 of 2022]
