BHAGWATPRASADSINGH Vs. BHUDEO TIWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application the three petitioners have come up for seeking a direction against the respondents to decide the seniority and confirmation of the petitioners in the rank of Inspector of Police in accordance with law and to consider their cases for promotion to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (in short Dy S. P.) before respondents No. 1 to 19 and to grant consequential benefits and to quash the revised gradation list issued with letter Annexure 2/1.

(2.) According to the petitioners, as stated by them in the writ application, pursuant to advertisement and various examinations and tests, they having been found fit by the selection Board were appointed as steno-sub-Inspector of Police on temporary basis. They joined their posts on 1.3.1967. Subsequently, as opted by them, they were absorbed and confirmed on the post in the cadre of sub-Inspector of Police with effect from 2.1.1969. One of such orders passed in favour of petitioner No. 2 has been filed as Annexure 1 to the writ application. The further case of the petitioners is that respondents No. 1 to 19 were appointed in the cadre of sub-Inspector of police on 2.1.1968 and they were confirmed with effect from 2.1.1970. It appears that keeping in view the date of initial appointment of the petitioners and the private respondents, a gradation list was prepared on 1.1.1980 in which the petitioners were shown senior to the respondents. Subsequently in the year 1979 the petitioners as well as the said respondents were promoted to the rank of Inspector of Police. By a letter dated 18th May, 1988 (Annexure 2/1) the Director-General of Police published a gradation list in respect of Inspectors of Police showing their inter se seniority. As is evident from the said letter, the seniority was determined on the basis of their seniority in the rank below. In other words Inter se seniority of the Inspectors were determined on the basis of their inter se seniority in the cadre of sub-Inspector of Police. The petitioners are essentially aggrieved with the seniority list as contained in Annexure 2/1. They filed representations for making corrections in the seniority list, inter alia, on the ground that keeping in view their date of appointment in the Government service they should be placed senior to the private respondents and accordingly it was requested that their cases be referred to the I. G Selection Board for considering their cases for their promotion in the cadre of Dy. S. P. But the respondents authorities refused to exceed to the said prayer.

(3.) The short question which has fallen for our consideration in this writ application is as to whether the date of appointment of the petitioners in tbe cadre of Steno. Sub-Inspectors of Police is to be treated as the basis for determination of their seniority in the cadre of Sub-Inspector of Police or their entry in the later cadre, would be the basis for the said purpose.