HC OM PARKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner joined the Haryana Police as a Constable on 29.5.1972 and he was promoted as Head Constable on 21.1.1985 under Rule 13.1 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Rules) as against the quota of 2%. The petitioner is seeking a direction from this Court to the respondents to confirm him in the promotional post since he has completed more than two years of service as envisaged under Rule 13.18 of the Rules and to direct the respondents to depute him to Intermediate School Course. In the written statement, the respondent contended, inter alia, that the petitioner did not pass the Lower School Course and his promotion was only officiating and purely on temporary and ad hoc basis since he was not eligible to be included in lists C-II prepared under Rule 13.8 of the Rules and the petitioner cannot take advantage of his temporary and ad hoc promotion. It is further averred that no person junior to the petitioner has been promoted. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to be confirmed in the rank of Head Constable. It is further averred that the petitioner became eligible to be included in List C-II in the year 1989 and has been promoted as officiating Head Constable on his due turn. It is further averred that those constables who have been confirmed upto 31.1.1991 have been sent to the Intermediate School Course and since the petitioner was not confirmed and his promotion was temporary and on ad hoc basis, he was not deputed to Intermediate School Course. It is, therefore, prayed that the writ petition be dismissed.

(2.) There is no dispute of the fact that the petitioner joined service as a Constable in the year 1972 and he has been promoted as Head Constable on 21.1.1985. According to the petitioner, he was promoted as against sports quota of 2% but in the written statement it is not specifically denied that the petitioner was not promoted under the sports quota. It is also not denied that there is reservation of 2% of the total strength for promotion from sportsmen. There cannot be any dispute that in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Rishal Singh v. State of Haryana & ors., 1994 2 SCT 556., there is no question of promoting a Constable on ad hoc basis, as Rule 13.3(2) of the Rules only envisages promotion within the quota. Since there is no denial of the fact that the petitioner has been promoted within the prescribed quota, it is to be taken that he has been promoted against regular vacancy within the quota of Head Constables who were entitled to be included in list C-II. If that is the case, the petitioner has a right to be considered for confirmation after two years of his service as Head Constable, since period of probation is only two years. In this view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to be confirmed on the post of Head Constable on completion of his probationary period, if not otherwise found to be unsuitable. I accordingly allow the petition and direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for confirmation in service from the date of completion of the probationary period.