ASHWANI KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claim of the petitioners is to consider them for promotion to the posts of Assistant Sub-Inspectors as also to quash the order Annexure P-2 in so far as the same relates to the promotions of respondents No. 4 to 31. Brief facts may first be enumerated.

(2.) Petitioners were selected and recruited as Constables in Haryana Wireless Police on dates duly reflected in paragraph 2 of the Writ Petition. All the petitioners were promoted as officiating Head Constables on various dates i.e. with effect from February 1, 1976 to December 1, 1976. As per their seniority, the petitioners were detailed for the course known as "Carrier Wave" course it is a qualifying course for promotion to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector in the Wireless Wing of Police. It is made out by the petitioners and not denied by the respondents that the petitioners successfully completed the qualifying course. The instructions which are applicable for promotion to the rank of Head Constable and that of Assistant Sub-Inspector Wireless Police go to show that after successfully completing the qualifying course, the officials would be considered for promotion to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspectors and those who did not join the qualifying course had to be placed below other officials in seniority. Their seniority has to be determined on completion of qualifying course alone. The positive case of the petitioners is that even though they had qualified the course and were entitled to be considered for promotion, respondent No. 3 passed the order for promotion of respondent Nos. 4 to 31 in an illegal and arbitrary manner. This action of respondent No. 3 is also styled by the petitioners to be against the rules and instructions. Further, it is also sought to be made out that the petitioners have been discriminated and the persons who are juniors to them and had become eligible on account of their having passed the qualifying course later have been promoted to the posts of Assistant Sub-Inspectors. Respondent No. 3 has promoted respondents No. 4 to 31, even though they had passed the qualifying course after the petitioners, on the basis of an interview test which is said to have been arbitrarily introduced by the said respondent. It is on the facts stated above that the petitioners have come up in this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and have prayed for quashing the order by which respondents No. 4 to 31 have been promoted and further for a direction to be issued to respondent No. 3 to consider them for promotion and accordingly promote them a day prior to the day when the aforesaid respondents were promoted to the posts of Assistant Sub-Inspectors.

(3.) In the written statement that has been filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3 although it has not been denied that the qualifying course is essential for any Head Constable to be considered for promotion to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector and that respondents No. 4 to 31 had passed the said qualifying course after the petitioners, the relief sought for by the petitioners is yet resisted on the ground that the said qualifying course only confers a right on the Head Constable for considering the case of promotion of said Head Constable to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector and that the same is not conclusive. It is made out from the contents of written statement which are also pressed into service at the time of arguments that promotion from the rank of Head Constable (Operator) to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Operators) has never been made merely on the basis of seniority and passing of the Continuous Wave Course. All promotion cases have to be considered by the Departmental Promotion Committees from time to time in accordance with Punjab Police Rule 13.1(1) and inasmuch as the petitioners were considered and not found suitable, they could not legitimately claim their promotion to the posts of Assistant Sub-Inspectors, prior in point. of time, to respondents No. 4 to 31 who were considered alongwith the petitioners. It is, thus, made out that the petitioners could not qualify the test whereas respondents No. 4 to 31 had passed the test and test being one of the modes of selection, the petitioners would not be justified to stake their claim to the posts of Assistant Sub-Inspectors.