Which one of the following categories of persons is not treated at par so far as the availability of Fundamental Rights is concerned ?

Article 33 of the Indian Constitution empowers Parliament to restrict or abrogate the Fundamental Rights of specific categories of personnel to ensure the proper discharge of their duties and the maintenance of discipline. These categories include members of the armed forces [2], forces charged with the maintenance of public order (police forces) [3], and members of forces employed in connection with communication systems set up for the purposes of any force or for the maintenance of public order. While options 1, 2, and 4 fall under the restrictive ambit of Article 33, option 3 refers to communication systems set up 'in the country' generally, rather than those specifically for public order or military use. Consequently, personnel in general national communication services are treated at par with ordinary citizens and civil servants, who enjoy full Fundamental Rights protection unless specifically modified by law [3].

Sources

1. [1] Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > ARMED FORCES AND FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS > p. 100
2. [2] Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 159
3. [3] Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 30: THE SERVICES AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONS > CHAP. 3D] THE SERVICES AND PUBIC SERVICE COMMISSIONS 439 > p. 445