SARJEET SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition for a writ of mandamus, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to upgrade his ACRs for the period 1990-91 to 1997- 98 and to treat them to be up to the benchmark for purposes of promotion. A mandamus directing the respondents to constitute a Review Departmental Promotion Committee for consideration of his case from the date he first became due for such promotion has also been prayed for.

(2.) The petitioner joined the Central Reserve Police Force as a Sub Inspector in the year 1969. In due course, he was promoted to the rank of Deputy Commandant in November 1990. He was considered for promotion to the next higher rank of Second-in-Command on different occasions between 1994 upto 2004 Since, however, his ACRs were found to be below the benchmark prescribed for such promotion, he was not recommended or promoted to the next higher rank. Aggrieved by his supersession, the petitioner filed W.P.(C) 7832/1999 in the High Court of Allahabad which was disposed of by an order dated 10th May, 2002 passed by the said Court with a direction to the Director General of the CRPF to consider, within two months, the representation which the petitioner may make in regard to his promotion.

(3.) A representation was accordingly made by the petitioner which was considered and rejected by order dated 29th May, 2003 passed by the Directorate General. The rejection order pointed out that the petitioner had been considered for promotion to the rank of Second-in-Command on 3rd August, 1994, 9th August, 1995, 25th June, 1996, 7th July, 1997, 11th February, 1998, 12th August, 194, 3rd February, 2000, 30th February, 2000, 30th January, 2001, 30th January, 2002, 11th March, 2002, 26th December, 2002 and 10th April 2003 but since the officer could not make the prescribed benchmark, he was not empanelled. The order further pointed out that the DPCs that considered the case of the petitioner had not committed any procedural error or irregularity and that government instructions regulating the conduct of DPCs had been followed in letter and spirit. The order noted that the supersession of the petitioner was on account of his overall performance which was not meritorious enough to earn him promotion to the next higher rank.