DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR Vs. SUBASH CHANDRA PADHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar (in short, the 'Tribunal') directing that the opp. party No. 1, who was applicant before the Tribunal, shall be restored to the officiating post of Assistant Sub -Inspector of Police from the date he was reverted and then deputed for the Assistant Sub -Inspector course of training, is under challenge in this writ application by the State Government.

(2.) SUBASH Chandra Padhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'employee') had filed a petition Under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (in short, the 'Act'). He had questioned his alleged reversion from the post of A.S.I, of Police to the substantive post of Constable. Prayer was to direct the Director General and Inspector General of Police, Orissa to allow him to work as Assistant Sub -Inspector of Police with all consequential service benefits, to quash the proceedings of the Central Selection Board and to direct him to send him for A.S.I's training and posting as A.S.I, with retrospective effect along with financial benefits.

(3.) STAND of the State Government before the Tribunal was that the applicant was allowed to officiate as Assistant Sub -Inspector of Police for less than one month on two occasions for Lok Sabha and Assembly Flections only to meet the urgent administrative exigencies. Though he passed the written test for the post of A.S.I. held on 1 8.2.1980.he. was not nominated for promotion to the rank of A.S.I. by either the Superintendent of Police or the D.I.G. of the concerned Range because of his bad record of service. The Central Selection Board also did not clear his case as he had received three black marks and a censure for misconduct. Record of applicant Subash was also not good. That is how the applicant Subash was not deputed for A.S.I.'s course of training. Subsequently he was allowed to officiate on ad hoc basis on leave vacancy.