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

2020 Supreme(AP) 547

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATI
M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.
N. Shankar Prasad - Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 8991 of 2020
Decided On : 13-10-2020

Advocates Appeared:
K.B. Ramanna Dora, Advocate

Special rules prevail over general rules in cases where there is a conflict between the two.

Headnote:

PROMOTION - POLICE - FITNESS - CRIMINAL CASE PENDING - DEPARTMENTAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING - STANDING ORDER 74.2 OF ANDHRA PRADESH POLICE MANUAL - APPLICABILITY - GENERAL RULES VS SPECIAL RULES - INTERPRETATION - G.O.MS.NO.257 GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SER.C) DEPARTMENT DATED 10.06.1999 - APPLICABILITY - FITNESS FOR PROMOTION - DETERMINATION - RELEVANCE OF CRIMINAL CASE AND DEPARTMENTAL PROCEEDINGS.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Reserved Sub-Inspector (Armed), was denied promotion to the post of Reserve Inspector due to a pending criminal case against him and ongoing departmental proceedings. The petitioner challenged this decision, arguing that the pendency of the criminal case and departmental proceedings did not disqualify him from promotion as per G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (SER.C) Department dated 10.06.1999.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the petitioner was not fit for promotion due to the pendency of the criminal case and departmental proceedings, as per Standing Order 74.2 of the Andhra Pradesh Police Manual. The court found that the petitioner was involved in a grave offence, which made him unfit for promotion. The court also held that G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (SER.C) Department dated 10.06.1999 was a general direction that did not apply to the petitioner's case, as he was governed by the special rules of the Andhra Pradesh Police Manual.

Issues: 1. Whether the pendency of a criminal case and departmental proceedings disqualifies an employee from promotion? 2. Whether G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (SER.C) Department dated 10.06.1999 applies to the petitioner's case?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the pendency of a criminal case and departmental proceedings can disqualify an employee from promotion if the employee is found to be unfit for promotion as per the relevant service rules. 2. The court held that G.O.Ms.No.257 General Administration (SER.C) Department dated 10.06.1999 is a general direction that does not apply to cases where there are special rules governing the service conditions of an employee.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner was not entitled to promotion due to his involvement in a grave offence and the pendency of criminal and departmental proceedings against him.

JUDGMENT

M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J. - This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claiming the following relief:

    "..........declaring the action of Respondents more particularly 2nd respondent in rejecting the candidature of petitioner for promotion to the higher rank and issuing impugned proceedings in memo Rc.No.786/F2/2018 dated 05.05.2020 as illegal, high-handed unconstitutional, deliberate, unwarranted, unsustainable, arbitrary against law, as well as principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the proceedings memo R.C No 786/F2/2018 dated 05.05.2020 and direct the Respondents to promote the petitioner for further higher rank with all consequential benefits"

    2. The petitioner was appointed as Reserved Sub-Inspector (Armed) on 15.07.2008 and posted as District Armed Reserve Police at Kakinada. While the petitioner was working in Traffic-I Police Station, Kakinada, he was suspended under Rule 8(1) of The Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (for short 'C.C.A Rules) vide proceedings R.O.546/1 on the ground that Crime No.244 of 2016 was registered against this petitioner under Sections 120-B, 201, 203, 213, 217, 218 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'I.P.C') and Section of 60-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 r/w 34 of I.P.C on the file of Indrapalem Police Station.

    3. It is the contention of the petitioner that, he was falsely implicated in the above crime. The petitioner also did not deny registration of the crime, but approached the High Court to quash charge sheet in Crl.P.No.735 of 2020. This Court vide order in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in Crl.P.No.735 of 2020 dated 10.02.2020 granting stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No.975 of 2019 on the file of V Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kakinada, East Godavari District, during pendency of the criminal petition.

    4. It is contended by the petitioner that, the provisional seniority list for promotion to the post of Reserve Inspectors was released on 01.01.2019 and the petitioner was shown at Serial No.1 in the order of seniority. However, the petitioner was denied promotion for the post of Reserve Inspector, on the ground that a criminal case is pending against him.

    5. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (henceforth 'the Tribunal') in O.A.No.2073 of 2018 and vide order dated 10.10.2018, O.A.No.2073 of 2018 was allowed, directing the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Reserve Inspector as per seniority, without reference to the pendency of Crime No.244 of 2016, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

    6. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal on 10.10.2018, the respondents/State preferred W.P.No.3315 of 2019, wherein the Division Bench of this Court dismissed the writ petition on 23.01.2020, confirming the order of the Tribunal and observed as follows:

      "Coming to the orders passed by the Tribunal, it is to be noted that the Tribunal had taken into consideration the orders of the State Government issued vide G.O.Ms.No.66 GAD (Services.C) Department, dated 30.01.1991, and directed the authorities to consider the case of the applicant for promotion. It is not the case of the petitioners herein that, as on the date of consideration of the case of the applicant, a charge sheet was filed. Therefore, this Court has absolutely no scintilla of hesitation to hold that the authorities are not justified in declining to consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of Reserve Inspector.

        It is also a settled and well established principle of law that, in the absence of any jurisdictional error or patent perversity, a writ in the nature of certiorari cannot be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This court does not find any such contingency in the case on hand.

          For the aforesaid reasons, Writ Petition is dismissed, confirming th

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