Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(AP) 178

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI
ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, JJ.
N. Shankar Prasad, S/o. N. Surya Narayana Murthy - Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District and others - Respondents
Writ Appeal No.384 of 2020
Decided On : 01-04-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. K. B. Ramanna Dora
For the Respondent: Mr. N. Aswartha Narayana, GP for Services-I.

Point of Law: Service Law – Denial of promotion - while every employee has a right to have his case considered for promotion, which is a guarantee flowing from Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, an employee has no right to seek promotion as a matter of right

Headnote:
Constitution of India,1860 - Articles 14 and 16 - Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 120-B, 201, 203, 213, 217, 218 and 221 - Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 69(A) - Rule 8(1),Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 – Promotion - Enquiry /investigation - Petitioner was denied promotion on ground pendency of criminal case though he was placed at Serial in seniority list and was eligible for promotion on basis of seniority he approached Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by filing - Tribunal by order allowed said directed respondent authorities to consider his case for promotion to post of Reserve Inspector as per seniority without reference to pendency of Crime within period of eight weeks from date of receipt order - Challenging said order of Tribunal State had approached this Court by filing writ petition which was registered - This Court by order dismissed said writ petition granting eight weeks’ time to implement order of Tribunal –
Finding of the Court:
Clause aforesaid itself demonstrates that Police Manual does not supersede any statutory rules service rules regulations and other orders issued by Government from time to time and if there is any contradiction or conflict latter will prevail - Therefore finding single Judge that Police Manual is special law and as such same will prevail over general law in our considered views not correct - Single Judge had himself observed that pendency of criminal case or departmental proceedings is not ground to deny promotion to writ petitioner in term General Administration SER Department - Single Judge dismissed Writ Petition only on ground that in terms of Standing Order Police Manual which is special law governing service petitioner lays down that because of criminal cases and disciplinary proceeding she is not fit to be considered for promotions special law overrides general law – Court have already that Andhra Pradesh Police Manual is not special law - Though writ petitioner in instant case has prayed for direction to promote him it is an established proposition law that while every employee has right to have his case considered for promotion which is guarantee flowing from Articles Constitution of Indian employee has no right to seek promotion as matter of right –
Result: Appeal allowed

JUDGMENT :

ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, J.

1. This writ appeal is presented against an order dated 13.10.2020 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.8991 of 2020 dismissing the said writ petition filed by the appellant herein.

2. Heard Mr. K.B. Ramanna Dora, learned counsel for the appellant-writ petitioner, and Mr. N. Aswartha Narayana, learned Government Pleader for Services-I, for the respondents.

3. At the time of filing of the writ petition, the writ petitioner was working as Reserved Sub-Inspector (Armed) and was posted at District Armed Reserve Police, Kakinada. While he was working in Traffic-I Police Station, Kakinada, he was suspended under Rule 8(1) of Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (for short, ‘the Rules of 1991’), by proceedings R.O.No.544/16 dated 20.12.2016 of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Eluru Range, on the ground that Crime No.244 of 2016 under Sections 120-B, 201, 203, 213, 217, 218 and 221 of IPC and Section 69(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, read with Section 34 of IPC, was registered on the file of Indrapalem Police Station. Subsequently, by order dated 09.04.2017, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Eluru Range, in exercise of powers conferred by Clause (c) of Sub-Rule (5) of Rule 8 of the Rules of 1991, had revoked the order of suspension without prejudice to the “Oral Enquiry/Criminal case pending against him”.

4. When the petitioner was denied promotion on the ground of pendency of criminal case, though he was placed at Serial No.1 in the seniority list and was eligible for promotion on the basis of seniority, he approached the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, by filing O.A.No.2073 of 2018. The Tribunal, by order dated 10.10.2018, allowed the said O.A. and directed the respondent authorities to consider his case 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. Challenging the said order of the Tribunal, the State had approached this Court by filing a writ petition, which was registered as W.P.No.3315 of 2019. This Court, by order dated 23.01.2020, dismissed the said writ petition, granting eight weeks’ time to implement the order of the Tribunal.

5. It is pleaded that the writ petitioner, by filing W.P.No.8782 of 2019, had questioned initiation of disciplinary proceedings against him by the order dated 06.06.2019 of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Eluru Range, West Godavari District and that this Court, by order dated 01.10.2019, had disposed of the said writ petition staying the departmental enquiry initiated against the writ petitioner for a period of one year from the date of the order and giving liberty to the writ petitioner to approach the Court again if the trial is not concluded within one year.

6. It is pleaded that the writ petitioner had also filed a petition, being Crl.P.No.735 of 2020, before this Court to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.975 of 2019 on the file of V Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kakinada, East Godavari District, arising out of the Crime No.244 of 2016 registered against him. This Court, by order dated 10.02.2020 in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in the said Criminal Petition, had granted stay of all further proceedings in the said C.C.No.975 of 2019 till the next date of hearing.

7. It is pleaded in the writ petition that despite clear and categorical directions to the respondents to implement the orders of the Tribunal within eight weeks, an order dated 05.05.2020 was passed by the Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, holding that the petitioner is not entitled to be considered for promotion on the ground that departmental enquiry is pending against him and that the respondents published a list of candidates promoting them from the category of Reserve Sub-Inspector to the posts of Reserve Inspectors, by proceedings dated 12.05.2020.

8. In the s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document