RATHENDRA BISHNU NANHEN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SPARA >Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Counsel appearing for the State.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were appointed as Sub -Inspector of Police on 21.07.1980 and they received their time bound promotion and even Assured Career Progression (A.C.P.), when it became due and then in the year 2005, a seniority list was published by the Office of Director General -cum -Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand vide Memo No. 46 dated 20.09.2005 and that in the year 2006, the petitioners were promoted to the post of Inspector of Police.

(3.) COUNTER affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it has been stated that the petitioners have been taking Annexure -2 as a seniority list, but in fact it is not a seniority list, rather it is only order relating to the promotion with respect to 100 Sub -Inspectors of Police to the rank of Inspector of Police. It has also been stated that whenever provisional seniority list of Inspector of Police would be prepared, the same shall be circulated for Inviting objections and as such the instant application being premature, the petitioners do not have any course of action and hence application is fit to be dismissed.