PRABHU LAL KHATIK Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of counsel for both the parties, the writ petition has been heard finally and the same is being disposed of at the admission stage.

(2.) By this writ petition, the Petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 5.4.2007 (Annx. 10) passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal (in short 'the Appellate Tribunal) in Appeal No. 610/2002, order 16.1.2002 (Anx.4) passed by the Appellate Tribunal in Contempt Petition No. 221/1999 and the promotion order 29.5.1997 (Anx. 2) and has further prayed for a direction to the Respondents to consider his candidature for promotion to the post of Rajasthan Police Service (Junior Scale) against the quota of year 1996-1997 and if found suitable for promotion, he may be promoted to that post along with all consequential benefits from the date his juniors have been promoted.

(3.) The facts, in brief, of the case are that on the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee constituted under Rule 20 of the Rajasthan Police Service Rules, 1954, against the quota of the year 1996-97, promotion of Police Inspectors to the Rajasthan Police Service (Junior Scale) were made which included certain persons junior to the Petitioner whereas the Petitioner was not promoted, therefore, the Petitioner filed appeal No. 736/1997 before the Appellate Tribunal which was disposed of on 10.6.1999 with the observation that the Respondents will hold review DPC within three months and will ensure that there should not be any discrimination between the officers in the matter of promotion. It was further observed by the Appellate Tribunal that if persons whose increments have been withheld are promoted, then depriving the Petitioner on the ground of censure is not proper, particularly when he is a member of Scheduled Caste and that the aforesaid observations be complied with within a period of four months and in case the Petitioner is selected by the review DPC for promotion, then he may be given all consequential benefits like his juniors. When the compliance of order dated 10.6.1999 was not made within the stipulated period, the Petitioner filed a contempt petition which was registered as Contempt Petition No. 221/99. In the said contempt petition, the State Government submitted a photo stat copy of an order dated 2.1.2002 wherein it was mentioned that the review DPC was held and the Petitioner had not been found suitable for promotion. After perusal of the said order dated 2.1.2002, the Appellate Tribunal observed, in contempt petition on 16.1.2002, that since the compliance of the order has been made by holding the review DPC, the contempt proceedings are dropped and in case the Petitioner is not satisfied, then he could file fresh appeal.