CONSTABLE KALI RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution, seeking a direction to the State of Haryana (respondent No. 1); Director General of Police (respondent No.2); Deputy Inspector General of Police, Ambala Range (respondent No.3); and Superintendent of Police, Kurukshetra (respondent No.4) to consider the petitioner for promotion from the rank of constable to that of Head Constable.

(2.) The petitioner holds a degree in M.A and was appointed as a police constable in the State Government of Haryana on 3.4.1984. He was, in March 1991, brought on Promotion List B-1 for the purpose of promotion to the post of Head Constable. The petitioner made an application for direct recruitment as Assistant Sub Inspector (A.S.I.) in response to an advertisement by the Haryana Subordinate Service Selection Board in the year 1988. He appeared in the written test and interview as well as the physical test in the year 1989. He was appointed as a probationary A.S.I. on 19.7.1991 and the completed training from 20.7.1991 to June,1992. The said training called as Intermediate School Course, was required to be undergone after selection in direct recruitment as A.S.I. Selection so made was, however, challenged by certain candidates, whereupon the selection was quashed by the Supreme Court of India in July 1994. Consequently, the petitioners' service as A.S.I. stood terminated and he was adjusted back as a police constable in the Department. The petitioner made a representation for promotion to the rank of Head Constable on the plea that he had already passed B-1 test in the year 1991 and, thereafter, he had undergone Intermediate School Course as part of training for appointment as A.S.I. He, therefore, wanted his name to be included in the list for C-1 test. The petitioner's representation was rejected.

(3.) The respondents have, in their joint reply, challenged the assertion in ade by the petitioner with the plea that the petitioner, being a police constable, could be promoted to the rank of Head Constable, after passing the Lower School Course only. Since the petitioner had not passed that course, he was not eligible for promotion. The fact that the petitioner's name had been included in List 'B' would not confer any right upon the petitioner to get his name included in List 'C'. The petitioner's name has been put in List 'B' only but that was not sufficient. Promotion from the rank of constable to the rank of Head Constable is made on the basis of the order of merit secured in the Lower School Course. The fact that the petitioner was selected as A.S.I. in direct recruitment and that he was sent for training as A.S.I. is said to be of no help to the petitioner for claiming promotion from List 'B' to List 'C'. Since the appointmentby direct recruitment stood quashed under the orders of the Supreme Court, the petitioner could not derive any benefit whatsoever from that appointment or training. Whatever training the petitioner had undergone as a directly recruited probationary A.S.I., that would have no relevancy for the purposes of promotion to List 'C' and as Head Constable.