RAMESH CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, for the State and for the Intervenor.

(2.) PETITIONER 'scase is that being a recipient of President 'sfire service medal for incidents of year 1991. and 1992 for gallantry work and distinguished service respectively he was entitled for a proper consideration for out of turn promotion to the post of Assistant State Fire Officer equivalent of Inspector of Police, as per provisions of Rule 660-C of the Police Manual. His grievance is that in spite of such distinguished service career and enabling provision in the Police Manual, his representations for such promotion had no effect and the claim of the petitioner was wrongly rejected by the DG Board vide letter contained in Memo No. 3579 dated 8.9.1995 (Annexure -10) only on the ground that the case of the fire service personnel for out of turn promotion was not in accordance with or covered by the rules.

(3.) BY virtue of rule 11, as noticed above, the provisions of Bihar Police Manual are to apply mutatis mutandis to the members of the Bihar Fire Service in respect of matters not covered by the rules or the rules made by the Inspector General of Police under section 22 of the Bihar Fire Service Act. It is not pleaded or argued on behalf of the respondents or the interveners that the matter of out of turn promotion as provided under rule 660 -C of the Bihar Police Manual is covered by any rules governing personnel of Bihar Fire Service. Hence, it has to be accepted, as contended on behalf of the petitioner, that rule 660-C of the Bihar Police Manual applies to personnel of Bihar Fire Service by virtue of rule 11 of the rules. It appears that by a letter dated 28.11.1994 (Annexure-7) the State Government in the Department of Home (Police) also took an independent decision to apply rule 660-C of the Bihar Police Manual for grant of out of turn promotion to the personnel of Bihar Fire Service wherever such personnel have been awarded President 'smedal for gallantry/distinguished service. Learned counsel for the petitioner appears to be right in submitting that in view of undisputed equivalence and parity between President 'smedal for gallantry and distinguished service to the police personnel and to the personnel of fire service, the decision contained in Annexure-7 is merely a surplus and rule 660. -C of the Bihar Police Manual was already applicable to the personnel of Bihar Fire Service by virtue of rule 11. of the rules. Appendix -67 relating to rule 1088 of the Police Manual annexed as Annexure -18 to the writ application, refers to and contains provisions for grant of President 'smedal for gallantry and distinguished service to the police service as well as the fire service and the same also supports the contention of the petitioner regarding equivalence of the President 'smedal for two services. The use of the term "mutatis Murari Krishna Prasad Sinha Versus State Of Bihar mutandis" in rule 11 clearly shows that although rule 660-C of the Police Manual does not mention the personnel of the fire service but still it shall apply to them also and the necessary changes have to be read into rule 660-C of the Police Manual. The contrary stand taken on behalf of the respondent-state as appear in paragraph 3(a) and (c) of the counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no.4 that rule 660-C of the Bihar Police Manual mentions only the police personnel and President's Police medal etc. therefore, it cannot have any application to personnel of the fire service who are recipient of President 'sFire Service Medal, is held to be misconceived and untenable in law.