S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

1. The petitioner, in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questions orders dated 19.03.2009 and 02.09.2006 of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereafter “the CAT”), in R.A. No. 130/2007 and O.A. No. 144/2005 respectively which denied ad-hoc out of turn promotion to him. The CAT reasoned that promotion is not a matter of right and that the competent authority rejected the petitioner’s request upon due consideration.

2. The relevant facts of this case are that the petitioner joined the Delhi Police as Sub-Inspector (Exe) in 1985 in the sports quota. From the time of his appointment, he participated in various sports events. He won the gold medal in the hammer throw event at the Second National Games held in Trivandrum on 27.12.1987, thereby creating a new National Games record. In 1990, the petitioner participated as an athlete in the International Athletic Permit Meet. He also won the bronze medal in the National Meet in 1990. In 1989-1990, the petitioner applied for out of turn promotion to the rank of Inspector (Exe) on the basis of Standing Order (SO) No. 4 which is in respect of Recruitment and Further Promotion of Sportsmen in Delhi Police. According to this S.O., a Sub-Inspector (Exe) is eligible for promotion to the rank of Inspector if he wins a gold medal in the National Games.

3. The Petitioner's case was considered and assessed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Sports) on merits. The request was rejected on the technical grounds that though the petitioner had secured a gold medal in the 1987 National Games, S.O. No. 4 came into existence with effect from 08.12.1989 and did not have retrospective effect. The second request made by the petitioner was also declined on 27.12.1990. He then appealed to the competent authority to reconsider his case on the basis of the relevant rules governing the issue prior to the S.O., namely the Delhi Police (Promotion and Confirmation) Rules which came into existence with effect from 29.12.1980. Rule 19 specifically addressed the granting of ad-hoc or out of turn promotions to sportsmen. Accordingly the case was considered and assessed at different levels of the department continuously for more than 12 years but did not yield any outcome. In the meantime, DCP Sports by memo dated 17.04.2000 categorically stated that the petitioner was fit for out of turn promotion as an outstanding sportsman under Rule 19(ii) of the Delhi Police (Promotion and Confirmation) Rules, 1980. The Screening Committee of Delhi Police considered and recommended the case of the petitioner for out of turn promotion under Sports Quota on 05.12.2000. The Commissioner of Delhi Police recommended and forwarded the case of the petitioner to the Government of NCT of Delhi for the approval of the LG/Administrator. Nevertheless, after the matter remained pending with the respondent for more than 12 years, the petitioner's case was rejected by order dated 03.10.2002 without any reason being assigned whatsoever.

4. The petitioner accordingly filed O.A. No. 2757/2002. The CAT, by order dated 20.02.2003 allowed the application and directed the first respondent to consider the case of the petitioner under Rule 19(ii) of the 1980 Rules. The petitioner represented to the first respondent for execution of the order of the CAT. In the interregnum, on 16.07.2003 he was promoted to the rank of Inspector. On 28.08.2003, he again urged for out of turn promotion according to the directions of the CAT. He subsequently filed contempt proceedings (CP 18/2004) before the CAT against the respondents. Since the contempt petition had been filed, the first respondent was requested to grant out of turn promotion to the petitioner w.e.f. 1988. The first respondent addressed a communication to the Joint Commissioner of Police on 08.04.2004 stating that after due consideration the petitioner was not fit for the promotion because he did not have “conspicuous achievements” and his pe