TEG BAHADUR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for a writ of Mandamus on the respondents to declare to the post of Senior District Prosecutor as equivalent to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police and to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the cadre of Indian Police Service after inclusion of his name in the select list.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed on 1.7.1960 by the State Government as a Senior District Prosecutor in the rank and pay scale of Deputy Superintendent of Police under the Police Act, 1961. The petitioner was assigned prosecution work as well as general work of Police. According to the petitioner, although he was designated as Senior District Prosecutor, from time to time he had been assigned work of general police, details whereof have been given in the writ application. In respect of performance of his duties of the general police, superior officers have granted certificates appreciating his merit as a police officer. Copies of entries in the character roll as well as copies of the certificates granted to the petitioner from time to time have been annexed. Before the name of the petitioner could he included in the select list containing the list of officers who are found fit for promotion to the cadre of Indian Police Service, a controversy arose as to whether the post of a Senior District Prosecutor can be held to be equivalent to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police, so that incumbent of such posts may be considered for promotion to the cadre of Indian Police Service. Some of the Deputy Superintendents of Police filed a writ application before this Court which was numbered as C.W.J.C. No. 1913 of 1980, in which one of the questions involved was as to whether a Senior District Prosecutor is holder of a post equivalent to the post of a Deputy Superintendent of Police. During the pendency of that writ application, the petitioner filed the present writ application.

(3.) In the aforesaid writ application, i.e., C.W.J.C. No. 1913 of 1980, the petitioner was respondent No. 4. That writ application was heard by a Full Bench. One of the questions in dispute, as I have already pointed out, was whether the post of Senior District Prosecutor can be held to be equivalent to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police. After referring to the different materials produced on behalf of the parties on the aforesaid issue, including the different circulars and rules issued from time to time, the Full Bench in the aforesaid case Md. Sulaiman and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors. 1981 B.B.C.J. 513, was of the opinion that the petitioner although appointed as a Senior District Prosecutor had been absorbed to the cadre of Deputy Superintendent of Police. This Court also approved the decision of the State Government counting the earlier experience of such Senior District Prosecutors for purposes of senioriy, in that connection, it was held . ...I hold that the decision of the State Government to count the earlier experience of the respondents for the purpose of their seniority is perfectly valid, and even if there had been no rule applicable to the case, the State Government would have been justified in making a decision to that effect. However, the Full Bench did not decide the question, whether on the basis of the seniority given to such Senior District Prosecutors, they are entitled to be included in the select list for promotion to the cadre of Indian Police, Service, because that question was pending consideration in the present writ application.