SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 462

2004(4) Supreme 181
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Punjab and Haryana High Court)
S. Rajendra Babu, Mrs. Ruma Pal and B.P. Singh, JJ.
S.I. Paras Kumar and Ors. -Appellants
versus
S.I. Ram Charan and Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 2273 of 2004
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 13389/1998)
With
Civil Appeal Nos. 2274, 2276-2301/2004
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 17591/1998, 19246/1998, 15944/1998, 2083/1999, 18492/2001, 14283/1998, 16514/1998, 16102/1998, 2082/1999, 20840/1998, 15943/1998, 7817-18/1999, 2080/1999, 17648/1999, 15542/1998, 14694-95/1998, 14313/1998, 19245/1998, 20839/1998, 18493-94/2001, 18497/2001, 15945-46/1998 and 16829/1998)
Decided on 12-4-2004
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appearing Parties : Kapil Sibal, P.P. Rao, Tapas Ray, V.A. Mohta, H.S. Phoolka, Sr. Advocates, Raj Kumar Gupta, Sheo Kr. Gupta, A.N. Bardiyar, S.C. Paul, Kanwaljeet Kochhar, Sonal Mahajan, Brij Bhushan, Hariom Yaduvanshi, Ms. Monika Gusain, Suman Bala Rastogi, Randhir Singh Jain, Dr. Krishan Singh Chauhan, Raj Singh Rana, Varinder Kumar Sharma, S. Srinivasan, Neeraj Kumar Jain, J.P. Dhanda, Rao Ranjit, Rajeev Sharma, R.S. Suri, Anil Kshetrapal, G.G. Singh, Debasis Misra, K.K. Gupta, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
Out of turn promotion based upon courage on anti terrorist front or outstanding performance in Sports by the DGP is not permissible under the Punjab Police Rules.

Headnote:SERVICE LAW-Indian Police Act, 1861-Sections 2 and 12-Punjab Police Rules, 1934-Rule 13-Ad hoc promotions on ORP basis-Validity-Director General of Police of Haryana issued a circular-Police Personnel selected to National Team held entitled to special consideration for promotion-DGP of Punjab issued guidelines and criteria for giving one rank promotion to Police Personnel who shows exemplary courage and bravery on Anti-Terrorist operations-All the petitioners appointed as Dy. SPs on one rank promotion basis-Scheme of out of turn promotion challenged-Reversion orders-Whether out of turn promotion based upon courage on anti terrorist front or outstanding performance in Sports by the Director General of Police is permissible under the Rules-(No).

       Held : Since the Punjab Police Rules are framed under section 2 of the Police Act, the promotion could be made only by following the procedure established under the relevant Rules. No promotions could be made by any procedure outside the scope of section 2 of the Police Act. Therefore the exercise is to see whether the impugned promotions are made following the Punjab Police Rules, which are framed under section 2 of the Police Act. Admittedly, even in the Memorandum issued by the DGP wherein the impugned adhoc promotion was detailed, it was clarified that the same were not based on the provisions of the Punjab Police Rules. In the instant case since the impugned promotions are not made under the Punjab Police Rules and as a result, those promotions are ultra vires to section 2 of the Police Act. Here, the powers exercised by the DGP could only be traced from section 12 of the Police Act. Powers under section 12 extend to administrative or organizational matters and the authority for promotion is not vested with the DGP. As per the scheme of the Police Act only the State Government is empowered to determine promotional aspects. Therefore, the impugned promotion made by the DGP cannot be treated as regular promotion under Chapter 13 of the Punjab Police Rules. The adhoc promotion carried out in the instant case is only ornamental in nature. Though the regular promotion could not be made by the DGP, he can definitely forge some methods under section 12 of the Police Act so as to encourage efficient officers who did yeomen service in anti-terrorist front or who earned laurels to the department. The impugned adhoc promotion could be treated as one such method to improve the efficiency of the police force by according special status for meritorious officers. Similarly under the Punjab Police Rules, Rule 13.2A, a subordinate (enrolled) police officer could be given next higher rank as local rank, in the interest of better functioning of the force. Such granting of a next higher rank is only an exercise of section 12 powers of the Police Act by the IG/DGP so as to improve the efficiency of the force or for administrative convenience. At the same time, it cannot be treated as regular promotion under Chapter 13 of the Punjab Police Rules. (Paras 9 to 11)

       In the special circumstances of this case, though the impugned promotions are not promotions under the Rules, the State came up with a proposal of the ORP scheme so as to deal with the out of turn/adhoc promotes. Therefore, we are of the opinion that those officials who are promoted within the 10 limit of Rule 13.8(2) could be given regular promotion and those who are beyond 10 limit of Rule 13.8(2) could be given ORP promotion which is designed to encourage and reward the good work of meritorious officers without excessively burdening the exchequer. (Para 13)

       

JUDGMENT

Rajendra Babu, J.-Leave granted.

2. The legal validity of out of turn promotion given to some Police Officials based upon their courage displayed during anti-terrorist operations or outstanding performance in Sports is the foremost matter for judgment in this batch of cases.

Promotions based on courage displayed in Anti Terrorist Operations:

1. SLP (C) No. 17591 of 1998. [Arising from final judgment in CWP No. 403/97 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court]

Chander Pal & others v. Ram Charan & others.

All together 14 Petitioners are in this case. All of them were appointed as Constables during the period 1976-89. They were promoted as Head Constables on the ground of showing bravery in anti-terrorist front or on the ground of outstanding performance in Sports. Show Cause notices were issued to them and they were reverted to the original rank. Their writ petitions were disposed of by the High Court vide common order in 403/97. Challenging this order the present SLP is filed.

2. SLP (C) No. 19246 of 1998. [Arising final judgment in CWP No. 403 of 1997 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court]

Narinder Singh & others v. Ram Charan

Appellants got out-of-turn promotion on the basis of bravery shown in Anti-Terrorist Front. The original WP was disposed of along with 403/97. Challenging this the instant SLP.

3. SLP (C) No. 15944 of 1998. [Arising final judgment in CWP No. 403 of 1997 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court]

Sadhu Ram & Others v. Ram Charan & others

All together 16 Petitioners are in this case. All of them got one rank - out of turn promotion based on their bravery and exemplary courage during activities on Anti-Terrorist front. Subsequently the Respondents herein filed writ petition before the High Court challenging the out of turn promotion given to these Petitioners. High Court allows the Writ petition. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment, the present SLP.

4. SLP (C) No. 2083 of 1999 - [against final judgment dated 19/5/98 ]

Rameshwar Singh v. State of Haryana

Petitioner was originally appointed as a constable and was promoted as Head Constable. Later was promoted as ASI on the basis of his bravery. Subsequently reversion order was passed and he was reverted to the rank of Constable. This reversion order was challenged. High Court disposed of the writ vide common order in 403/97. Challenging this the instant SLP was filed.

5. SLP (C) No. 18492 of 2001. [Against final order dated 31/8/2002 passed by Hon ble Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in LPA No. 1957 of 2001].

Prem Das & others vs. Bachan Singh Randhwa & others.

All the petitioners in this case were given out of turn promotion on the basis of their meritorious service in Anti-terrorist front as Inspectors on ORP basis. They were not parties to Writ-Petition/Appeals. In accordance with the impugned order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Government is taking steps to revert the appellants. To prevent the furtherance of such an action, they approached the High Court. Both the petition and subsequent LPA were dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the present SLP.

6. SLP (C) No. 14283 of 1998 - [arising from final judgment dated 19/05/1998 in CWP No. 403/1997 of Punjab and Haryana High Court].

SI Ramesh Chander & Others v. SI Ram Charan & others.

Appellants 1 to 6 were given out of turn promotion on the basis of their courageous act in Anti-Terrorist Front. After the final judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No. 403/1997 they were reverted to lower ranks even without hearing. Present SLP challenges the said reversion orders.

7. SLP (C) No. 16514 of 1998. [Arising from judgment dated 19/05/98 in CWP No. 13023/1997].

Jahangir Singh v. State of Haryana

Appellant appointed as Constable. Later promoted as HC and then as ASI, his promotion was based on the activities in anti-terrorist front. Show Cause notice for reversion was served. Later an order of reversion was passed. Aggrieved by the decision he approached the High Court. High Court did not all














































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top