RAMPHAL MISHRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners were initially appointed as Constable. Thereafter in the year 1987 they appeared in the written examination for promotion as Head Constable. Having passed the said examination, in 1988 they appeared for range level examination at Kanpur. Having passed the said examination also, they appeared for physical test and passed the same. Their names were then announced as candidates who were successful for grant of promotion as Head Constable. However, on 28.8.1989 the result of the petitioners was cancelled on the ground that they did not possess the requisite qualification of having completed three years of service as Constable, as had been provided in the Circular of the Department. The petitioners challenged the said order in writ petition no.2839 of 1990, in which an interim order was initially granted and the petitioners were permitted to complete their training. However, by judgment and order dated 15.1.1998, the said writ petition was dismissed. Challenging the said judgment, the petitioners filed Special Appeal No.557 of 1998, which was allowed by this Court on 14.5.2001. In the said judgment, it was categorically held that as per the Police Regulations, the eligibility for promotion to the rank of Head Constables was only of passing the prescribed course of civil and armed police from the Police Training School, Sitapur. The Court thus held that since there was no requirement under the Regulations of having three years experience as constable, for grant of such promotion, hence such condition laid down by the executive instructions, which was contrary to the statutory provisions, could not be made a ground for non-consideration for promotion of a Government servant who would be otherwise eligible to be promoted in terms of the statutory provisions. Thus, while allowing the special appeal and setting aside the judgment passed in writ petition no.2839 of 1990, after holding that there was no reason for not considering the petitioners to be in the eligibility zone for consideration of promotion, the respondents were directed to consider the case of the petitioners for promotion. Pursuant thereto, treating the petitioners as duly qualified, they have been promoted as Head Constable with effect from 18.1.2002. The grievance of the petitioners is that they should be given promotion as Head Constables with effect from the date from which persons junior to them have been granted promotion.

(2.) I have heard Sri Ankush Tandon holding brief of Sri Vikas Budhar, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents and have perused the record.

(3.) In my view, no satisfactory explanation has been given by the respondents for having granted promotion to the petitioners only with effect from 18.1.2002 and not from the earlier date i.e. since when the vacancies on the post of Head Constable had existed. However, without going into merits of the case as to from which date the promotion ought to be given to the petitioners, as the same ought to have been considered by the respondents, this writ petition is finally disposed of with the direction that on a representation being filed by the petitioners before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Allahabad, respondent no.3, alongwith a certified copy of this order for grant of promotion from a date from which persons junior to the petitioners have been promoted or from the date the vacancies had become available for grant of such promotion after the petitioners had completed their training, the same shall be considered and decided by the said respondent by a reasoned order, in accordance with law, within two months from the date of filing of the representation.