INDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This will dispose of civil writ petitions no.189 of 1992,117 of 1992, 141 of 1992, 307 of 1992, 3798 of 1992, 5137 of 1992, 7428 of 1993 and 18933 of 1991 as common question of law and facts is involved therein. Facts are taken from Civil Writ Petition No.189 of 1992.

(2.) Initially, on 31.8.1966 petitioner was appointed as Constable in Punjab Armed Police. On 1.4.1969, he was sent on deputation to C.I.D., Intelligence, Punjab. He continued to serve C.I.D., where in the year 1973, he was promoted as Head Constable and on 12.6.1979, he was promoted to the post of A.S.I. On 12.12.1989, he was promoted as S.I. His promotion as Head Constable, A.S.I. and S.I. was provisional as C.I.D. Intelligence Wing has no cadre of its own and persons from the rank of Constable to that of S.I. are taken on deputation from various police organisations. After petitioner had served for nearly 23 years, order dated 26.7.1990 was passed where by petitioner was sought to be repatriated to his parent department where he has been asked to join as Constable. Against the order of repatriation, he made a sentation and on consideration of the same, vide order dated 3.9.1990, order of repatriation was cancelled. However, after a few days i.e. on 15.9.1990, petitioner has again been repatriated and order to that effect has been passed. The order, Annexure P/8 is being impugned in this writ petition on the ground that the respondents were bound to absorb the petitioner in C.I.D. Intelligence as he has 23 years' excellent and unblemished service record. The challenge is also on the ground that the respondents were repatriating him as Constable to his parent department when his juniors in the parent department had been promoted and working on the posts of S.I. and Inspectors.

(3.) In reply to the petition, respondents No.l to 3 have stated in their written statement that the petitioner had served C.I.D. for more than 23 years and he was given ad-hoc promotion upon the rank of S.I. However, they have stated that all the deputationists hold their lien in their parent units/districts for all intents and purposes and as such when the petitioner was repatriated, he was to join as a Constable. Written statement on behalf of his parent department has been filed through Sh. S. Chattopadhaya, S.S.P., Ludhiana, wherein it has been stated that the petitioner was sent on deputation to C.I.D. at his own request while serving as a constable and continues to be a Constable in the parent department. While serving in the C.I.D. Intelligence Department, petitioner was given ad-hoc promotions by the C.I.D. Intelligence but on his repatriation, he has to join as a Constable. As regards promotion of juniors of the petitioner in the parent department, respondents have stated that the petitioner cannot be promoted from the date his juniors were promoted as for promotions to the posts of H.C./A.S.I./S.I. or Inspector, petitioner was required to pass the test as provided under the Police Rules. Petitioner never applied for or appeared in those promotional test and, therefore, he is not entitled to promotion. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner cannot be made to suffer for no fault of his. Petitioner was sent on deputation to C.I.D. by the respondents where he served for 23 years and got three promotions and towards the fag end of his career, he cannot be sent back to his parent department as a Constable, when his record throughout remained absolutely above board and no adverse report has ever been conveyed to him.