HARI NATH CHOUBEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, petitioner has sought for direction to the Respondents to consider his case for promotion from post of Assistant Sub -Inspector of Police to the rank of Sub -Inspector of Police with effect from the date his juniors in service has been Promoted and to pay the differential salary from that date.

(2.) IT appears that in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Director Generalcum -lnspector General of Police and Inspector General of Police (Administration), Bihar, Patna, it is stated that earlier the case of the petitioner was considered by the Central Selection Committee in the meeting held from 10.1.2002 to 31.1.2002, but, he was not found suitable as he had received four major punishments. Besides this, it is also stated that in the year 2004, however, nominations of A.S.I, of Police were called for from all Range D.I.Gs., but, the same was not received with respect to the petitioner, as such, his case could not be placed before the Board in 2004. It is also stated that in the year 2005 nominations of the petitioner alongwith other A.S.Is. have been received and the promotion matter is under consideration of the Central Selection Board, which is in progress.

(3.) ON query as to how Central Selection Board has directed for review of the punishment, learned Government Pleader No. VII on 25.8.2005 referred to Rule 853A of Bihar Police Manual which empowers the concerned authority for review but within a reasonable time. He, however, fairly submitted that the Central Selection Board had no authority to give such direction. Further, he submitted that the State authorities have decided not to review the said order of punishment, which was passed long back. He, however, contended, that in view of the punishments awarded to the petitioner during his service on several occasion, he was not entitled to be considered; for promotion even after the adverse effect of the order of punishment lost its force pursuant to the Government circular/decision bearing no. 3/R 201/86 Ka 2475 dated 24th February, 1986. In support of this learned Government Pleader has relied upon the observation of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. K.V. Jankiraman, which has been quoted in paragraph 6 of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of T.N. vs.Thiru K.S. Murugesan, reported in (1995) 3 Supreme Court Cases 273.