THE STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. DALIP SINGH DHILLON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under clause X of the Letters Patent has been filed by the State of Punjab and the Director General of Police against the order of a learned single Judge whereby he allowed civil writ petition 6126 of 1986 and held that the respondent would be deemed to have been brought on list 'F' and promoted as Inspector and Deputy Superintendent of Police with effect from April 24, 1963, October 18, 1963 and February 13, 1975 respectively the dates on which his junior one Resham Singh was so promoted. Facts giving rise to this appeal lie in a narrow compass and may first be noticed.

(2.) Respondent who joined the Punjab Police as a constable in the year 1939 was promoted as Head Constable in the year 1944 and thereafter he was promoted as Assistant Sub Inspector in April, 1948. He was further promoted as Sub Inspector on April 1, 1952. He was again promoted as Inspector on January 21, 1966 and as Deputy Superintendent of Police on November 15, 1978. He retired from service on July 31, 1979 on attaining the age of superannuation when he was holding the rank of a Deputy Superintendent of Police. It is admitted that the respondent was confirmed as Sub Inspector on August 24, 1968 and as a result of acceptance of his representation on November 9, 1976 his date of confirmation was preponed to February 25, 1964. It is further admitted that one Resham Singh who was junior to him as Sub Inspector was confirmed on this post on 13.10.1965. the name of the respondent was brought on list 'F' on September 21, 1965 whereas the name of the said Resham Singh was brought on this list on April 24, 1963. As a consequence of dus, the respondent was promoted as an Inspector on January 21, 1966 whereas Resham Singh who was junior to him as Sub Inspector was promoted on 18.10.1963. thereafter, the said Resham Singh was also promoted as Deputy Superintendent of Police earlier than the respondents on February 13, 1975. When Resham Singh superseded the respondent as Inspector the latter filed a representation claiming promotion as Inspector from the date when his junior had been promoted. This representation was rejected on August 16, 1978 and he approached this Court by filing civil writ petition 5100 of 1978 challenging the order of rejection on the ground that his case had not been considered for promotion when Resham Singh had been promoted. In the reply filed in the aforesaid writ petition the appellants herein took the stand that the case of the respondent had been considered in 1963 and again in the year 1964 when Resham Singh was promoted as Inspector but the respondent was not found suitable. When the writ petition came up for hearing before this Court the learned Judge after examining the original record which was produced before him found that the Departmental Promotion Committee considered the names of certain eligible sub Inspectors and tick marked the names of those Sub Inspectors who, according to the Committee, deserved promotion the name of the petitioner was not tick marked. It was also found that there were some departmental proceedings pending against the respondent as a result whereof he was not considered for promotion. The learned Judge then while disposing of the writ petition observed that "This consideration, to my mind, is no consideration as no reasons for not promoting the petition have been mentioned anywhere in the record which has been produced before me." The writ petition was allowed and the respondents therein (appellants) were directed to dispose of the claim of the respondent by a speaking order. In pursuance of the directions of this Court the Departmental Promotion Committee examined the service record of the respondent for judging his suitability for entry of his name on list 'F' with effect from April 24, 1963 the date on which the name of Resham Singh had been included in the said list the Committee did not find the respondent fit for giving him ante-date promotion as Inspector due to his unsatisfactory record for the period 1953-54 onwards. He was, however, considered fit for entry of his name with effect from September 21, 1965 the date from which he was actually brought on the list. The Director General of Police accordingly passed an order on April 8, 1986 (annexure P5 with the writ petition) holding the respondent unfit for ante-date promotion. The respondent challenged this order in this Court in civil writ petition 6126 of 1986 which has given rise to the present appeal.

(3.) The sole dispute between the parties is as to whether the respondent is entitled to promotion as Inspector and Deputy Superintendent of Police with effect from the dates when Resham Singh was promoted. It is relevant to observe here that all promotions in the police force from one rank to another are made by selection tempered by seniority and efficiency and honesty are the main factors that govern the selection. For the purpose of regulating promotion to the rank of Inspector promotion list 'F' is maintained in the office of Inspector General and the persons whose names appear in this list are promoted to this rank. According to Rule 13.17 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 there are three kinds of Annual Confidential Reports, namely, A,B and C and are marked as such. Report A' recommends promotion irrespective of seniority whereas Report 'B' recommends that promotion be given in the ordinary course of seniority. Report 'C', on the other hand, recommends that the officer be passed over for promotion for certain reasons with which we are not concerned in the present appeal.