HC pulls up police department

THE ALLAHABAD High Court has quashed the report dated September 21, 1997 of the promotion committee headed by DIG, Personnel, Police Headquarter, by which the claim for out-of-turn promotion by a sub-inspector of Uttar Pradesh Police was rejected.

THE ALLAHABAD High Court has quashed the report dated September 21, 1997 of the promotion committee headed by DIG, Personnel, Police Headquarter, by which the claim for out-of-turn promotion by a sub-inspector of Uttar Pradesh Police was rejected.

HT Image

Allahabad,While allowing the writ petition (no-10313 of 1999) filed by sub-inspector Radha Mohan Dwivedi, Justice Rakesh Sharma directed police authorities to reconsider the case of the petitioner for out-of-turn promotion on the post of inspector in the light of recommendations sent by the superintendent of police, Muzaffarnagar, within three months.

Passing these directives, the court observed, “A perusal of Promotion Committee report dated September 21,1997 reveals that it has not considered the detailed recommendation sent by the superintendent of police, Muzaffarnagar dated May 27,1995.

The superintendent of police had put forth events, details of the conduct and performance of the petitioner exhibited by him at the time of the incident dated January 2,1995. He being the apex officer posted in the district was the best judge to assess the suitability of a sub-inspector for promotion.

The incident must have been reported to him instantly and immediately and as appears from his letter dated May 27,1995, he had drawn his own conclusions about the petitioner. This opinion formed by the superintendent of police, Muzafarnagar cannot be ignored. No reasons have been recorded by the committee while considering the case of the petitioner.

The matter was discussed, but in the absence of sufficient reasons for not recommending the case of the petitioner for promotion, the committee has erred in doing its duty. It appears to be a case of non-application of mind. In a telegraphic language, the committee has rejected the case of the petitioner. The total material and substance as indicated by the superintendent of police ought to have been considered and dealt with by the Promotion Committee’’.

As per records, the superintendent of police, vide letter dated May 27,1995, after narrating all the relevant events, had strongly recommended the case of the petitioner for out-of-turn promotion. .

The Promotion Committee, headed by the DIG Personnel, Police Headquater rejected the case of the petitioner. The committee did not recommend the case of the petitioner for allowing him out-of-turn promotion.

The counsel for the petitioner assailed the decision of the committee on several grounds. He submitted that the petitioner was purposefully discriminated against and the relevant materiel was not taken into consideration.

However, the State counsel opposed the writ petition on the basis of the reply filed by the police department.

He submitted that the petitioner’s case was not covered under the government order dated February 3,1994. According to him, the case of the petitioner was duly considered and was not recommended by the Promotion Committee. The action was just and proper. The petitioner cannot claim his promotion as a matter of right.

According to him, the petitioner’s case was covered by the relevant administrative instructions including the government order dated February 3,1994. The petitioner was entitled for out-of-turn promotion for his extra-ordinary and exemplary act of bravery, which was exhibited by him in the event dated January 2,1995, details of which were given in the aforesaid letter of the superintendent of police, Muzaffarnagar