2013 Supreme(Kar) 280

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
N. Kumar and B. Manohar, JJ.
Ramesh Rangashamaiah - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Karnataka represented by its Chief Secretary, Karnataka Government Secretariat Bangalore and Others - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 3269 of 2012 connected with Writ Petition Nos. 3506-3507 of 2012 etc. etc.,
Decided On : 25.4.2013

Headnote:LABOUR & SERVICES - Recruitment: [N.Kumar & B. Manohar, JJ] Recruitment to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police - Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1995 - Regulation 2(1)(j)(ii) - Persons who scored more marks were allotted to the main Police force (Civil Police) which carries out the maintenance of law and order, investigation of crimes and mainly detection and prevention of crimes and persons who scored less marks were allotted to Karnataka State Reserve Police, Armed Reserve and Wireless Police - Regulations providing for promotion of Deputy Superintendent Police who holds the charge of sub-division of Police Administration to Indian Police Service - The duties and responsibilities of Assistant Commandants of Karnataka State Reserve Police, Armed Reserve and Wireless do not carryout duties such as investigation of crime, maintenance of law and order and other duties carried out by Deputy Superintendent Police of Civil Police - Government Order No. DPAR 115 SPS 2010 dated 1.10.2010 - Declared that the other police services constituted by the State Government viz., Police Wireless, Karnataka State Reserve Police and Karnataka Armed Police and the officers in their auxiliary units not below the grade of Dy.S.P. viz., (i) Deputy Superintendent of Police (Wireless), (ii) Assistant Commandant (KSRP) and (iii) Deputy Superintendent of Police (Armed) in these units are equivalent to that of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Civil) i.e., Principal Police Service for the purposes of promotion to IPS for the vacancies available for the year 2009 only, subject to their satisfying the conditions mentioned in the said Government Order - Challenged as ultra vires by applicants belonging to Civil Service - Police Officers belonging to auxiliary services challenged condition Nos. 2 and 3 stipulated in Government Order as arbitrary - By Government Order dated 21.7.2011 the Government Order dated 1.10.2010 was with drawn - Challenged.

        Held, from the material on record it is clear that, unless an equivalence is declared by the Government, the police officers who form the part of the auxiliary services cannot be considered for being included in the list. However, the police officers who belong to the principal police force are the persons whose name is to be included in the list for being considered for being promoted to IPS cadre. As is clear from the Government Order of 2010 the reason for equivalence is there are no sufficient number of persons in the principle police force who could be promoted to IPS. If that is so persons who are eligible in the Principal Police Force their case should be considered automatically without waiting for equivalence being granted by the Government. Because of the litigation it appears their case though considered no final decision is taken. It is unjust. Therefore, the declaration of equivalence by the Government should not come in the way of the claims of persons in the Principal State Police Service for being considered or promoted as IPS officers. If already the names are sent they shall be considered and appropriate orders be issued without any further loss of time.

        Impugned order of Government dated 1.10.2010 was setaside. Consequently Government Order dated 21.7.2011 became infructuous. Authorities were directed to constitute a broad based expert committee to resolve the disputes at the earliest and also gave further directions. After constitution of such committee, the committee shall give sufficient opportunity to the varying fractions and resolve the dispute and submit their report to the Government within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On submission of the said report, the Government shall take decision regarding equivalence within 2 months there from. It is made clear the Government decision should contain the reasons either for granting equivalence or refusing to grant equivalence so that the aggrieved person could agitate his rights before this Court. It is made clear the authorities shall proceed to consider the case of police officers of the Principal State Police Force whose name already finds a place in the list of persons to be considered for promotion and it shall not be postponed on the pretext of the constitution of the committee or submission of the report or the decision of the equivalence to be taken by the Government.