PRAMOD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 14.10.1999 (Annexure-1 to the petition) so far as it is against the petitioner and for quashing the adverse annual remarks for the year 1996-97 [Annexure-2 to the petition).

(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) The petitioner was selected as Deputy Superintendent of Police in the 1989 Batch. He was given an adverse entry for the years 1996-97 vide Annexure-2 to the petition. In that entry. It was stated that he does not take interest in his work. Against that entry he made a representation which was rejected by order dated 14.10.99. However, it appears that he had been given an entry in the year 1996 by the then Commandant 41 PAC Battalion to the effect that he takes interest in his work and his Integrity was certified vide Annexure-3 to the petition. He was also given good entries in subsequent years vide Annexure-3. As regards the adverse entry, he made a representation vide Annexure-5 to the petition. It is alleged in paragraph 6 to the petition that the Director General of Police whom the representation was made called for comments from the respondent No. 3 and the Director General of Police found that there was no Justification for the adverse annual remarks against the petitioner and the entry was not Justified. True copy of the report of the Director General of Police dated 26.4.99 is Annexure-6 to the petition. In his order the Director General of Police observed that there was no basis for withholding the petitioner's integrity and there was no material for giving the adverse entry. In view of this order, the respondent No. 1 allowed the petitioner's representation with regard to the withholding of Integrity but maintained the rest of the remarks against the petitioner. The petitioner's grievance is that in view of this entry, his chances of promotion will be affected.