TIRATH RAM Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) After conclusion of the arguments, Mr. Masih the learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, states on the basis of record that so far as Petitioners Nos. 1, 2, 7, 8, 16, 18 to 31, 33 to 36, 38 to 40, 42 to 50, 54 to 58, 64, 65, 66, 69, 63 and 78 are concerned, they have since been confirmed on the same date by the impugned order (Annexure P-9) itself and that being the position, they had no cause of action and in any case, the matter on their behalf has become infructuous. Mr. Vinod Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners was unable to controvert the position as noticed. That being so, the writ petition on behalf of the aforesaid petitioners is disposed of with the observation that since they had already been confirmed as Head Constables on 1.7.1989 and the relief asked for by them has already been granted to them, there is no cause of action for them to come to this Court. This Court is now left to decide the cause of other petitioners for which facts need necessary mention.

(2.) The prayer in the petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on behalf of the petitioners, other than mentioned above, is to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing order dated 16.8.1989 (Annexure P-9) vide which respondents 6 to 25 were confirmed as Head Constables without considering the case of the other Head Constables like the petitioners. It is pleaded that the petitioners after having passed the Lower School Course as Constables were brought on the promotion list C-I and on the basis of seniority, they were promoted as officiating Head Constables on different dates. The date of promotion of some of the petitioners is reflected from Annexures P-1 to P-6 attached to the petition. The promotion in the Police Department is governed by Chapter XIII of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 , Volume II and according to Rule 13.1, promotion from one rank to another and from one grade to another in the same rank is made by selection tempered by seniority and while promoting efficiency and honesty are to be seen as the main factors governing the selection. The petitioners plead that for the purpose of regulating promotion amongst the enrolled police officers, six promotion lists i.e. A, B, C, D, E and F are to be maintained. The aforesaid lists are to be maintained in each district in view of the provisions contained in Rules 13.6, 13.7, 13.8 and 13.9. This is for regulating promotion to selection grade Constables to the rank of Head Constables and Assistant Sub-Inspectors. Petitioners, it is further pleaded, were brought on list 'C' under Rule 13.8, after passing the Lower School Course from Police Training College, Phillaur. Annual Confidential Reports prepared under Rule 13.17 of the petitioners are stated to be good, very good and excellent. Under Rule 13.18 of the Punjab Police Rules, Police officers promoted in rank are to be on probation for a period of two years and the Appointing Authority by a special order in each case can permit the period of officiating service to count towards the period of probation. Under the rules, the maximum period of probation is two years. Under Rule 13.19, a Constable receiving President's Police award and First Services Medal is entitled to be promoted to the first substantive vacancy of Head Constable which occurs in the district where he is serving subsequent to the award of the medal being gazetted. He is also entitled to the selection grade on promotion. The case of the petitioners is that none of the respondents was recipient of President's Police Medal or Fire Services Medal. Inspector General of Police issued instructions vide letter No. 12614-74/B dated 22.5.1964 regarding confirmation of promoted police officers for regulating the exercise of discretion given under Rule 13.18 for treating the officiating period for probation for the purposes of confirmation. Following guiding principles have been laid for confirmation officiating officers in their ranks :

(3.) Instructions aforesaid have been placed on record as Annexure P-7. The petitioners further plead that in view of the instructions Annexure P-7, number of persons were getting undue importance by confirming them before their seniors. This, obviously, affected their legal right and realising this condition, the Director General of Police, Punjab, Chandigarh vide Memo No. 83893-8433/E-2 dated 21st June, 1989, issued instructions to the effect that out of turn confirmation could be ordered in exceptional circumstances and that too with the prior approval of Director General/Inspector General of Police, Punjab. Instructions referred to above have also been placed on record as Annexure P-8. 233 vacancies of Head Constables were made permanent vide Punjab Govt. Memo No. 4/4/87-2HC (I)671 dated 6.1.1989 and Director General of Police endorsement No. 2589-2675/E-2 dated 30.3.1989 and vide order dated 16.8.1989, Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar, confirmed a number of Head Constables by giving them the benefit of officiating service towards the probationary period. Copy of the order is Annexure P-9 and it is reiterated that it is this order which is sought to be quashed by issuing a writ in the nature of ceriorari.