PRAN KRISHNA GOSWAMI Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THREE Sub Inspectors two of whom are confirmed while the third one is officiating belonging to the unarmed Branch of the Calcutta Police, obtained the present Rule on Writ petition which has since been referred to us under rule 3 Chapter V of the Original Side Rules since another Rule, obtained by another group of Sub Inspectors belonging to the same branch on another writ petition, was directed to he heard analogously with the present Rule, we have heard them as such. We propose to deal with the first of the writ petitions, as aforesaid, first.

(2.) AS recruitment to the rank to which the the petitioners belong is made from two sources, namely, direct recruits and promo tees, the primary dispute that has been raised In this writ petition by the three petitioners who are promotees, is with regard to relative seniority vis-a-vis the direct recruits and consequent benefits flowing therefrom. All the three petitioners have risen from lower ranks. While petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were appointed to officiate as Sub Inspectors in the year 1957 petitioner no. 3 was so appointed in the year 1975. According to the petitioners neither the quota rule nor the rules regarding recruitment had been followed in their true spirit in making recruitment to the rank of Sub Inspectors and long years of service rendered by them as officiating Sub Inspectors have not been counted either for confirmation or for seniority They claim that the quota rule should have been applied at the intial stage of recruitment irrespective of whether the posts to which recruitment was being made were permanent or temporary. So far as recruitment by promotion is concerned, it is claimed that such pro motion should always be made only from the rank of Assistant Sub Inspector and an assistant Sub Inspector once promoted even if to officiate as Sub Inspector must be confirmed in due course and seniority must be determined having regard to the date from which he continues to officiate. The petitioners have made out a grievance that contrary to the rules, the promotees from the rank of Assistant Sub Inspectors are being first promoted to officiate as officiating Sub Inspectors and then in filling up the permanent vacancies the authorities are applying the quota rule when such vacancies are being filled up by direct recruitment and promotion from officiating Sub inspectors and not from Asst. Sub Inspectors Thus long years of service rendered by the promotees as officiating Sub Inspectors in between are being totally wasted as they are not being given any credit for such service either for confirmation or for seniority. The procedure so adopted, they claim, is not in consonance with the true spirit of the rules and is resulting in hostile discrimination as against the promotees.

(3.) INCIDENTALLY they have made a further grievance that even recruitment to the rank of permanent Sub Inspectors had hot always been made in strict observance of the quota rules; for several years at a stretch the authorities have not constituted selection board for selection of departmental candidates for giving them promotion in their quota.