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

2016 Supreme(Del) 1293

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJIV KHANNA, ASHUTOSH KUMAR, JJ.
Surender Singh & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
Narender Kumar & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 5043/2011 & CM No. 5455/2014
W.P.(C) 5044/2011 & CM No. 581/2013
Decided On : 11-03-2016

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Jagjit Singh, Advocate
Mr. Satyakam, ASC for respondent Nos.2 to 5

The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the Delhi Police (Appointment and Recruitment) (Amendment) Rules, 2002, specifically Rule 17A(XV), Rule 17A(VIII), and Rule 17A(III) in determining the eligibility for promotion to the post of MT Inspector.

Headnote:

Promotion Eligibility - Delhi Police - Delhi Police (Appointment and Recruitment) (Amendment) Rules, 2002, Rule 17A(XV), Rule 17A(VIII), Rule 17A(III) - The court upheld the finding that the petitioners were not eligible for promotion to the post of MT Inspector. The court also directed the official respondents to reconsider the promotion of the petitioners as per the service rules and communicate the decision to the petitioners.

Fact of the Case:

The two petitioners challenged an order that held them ineligible for promotion to the post of Motor Transport Inspector (MT Inspector) in Delhi Police. The court directed the official respondents to reconsider the promotion of the petitioners.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioners were not eligible for promotion to the post of MT Inspector and directed the official respondents to reconsider the promotion of the petitioners.

Issues: The eligibility of the petitioners for promotion to the post of MT Inspector and the quashing of the Notifications dated 24.9.2010 and 16.11.2010 were the main issues.

Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the finding that the petitioners were not eligible for promotion to the post of MT Inspector. The court also directed the official respondents to reconsider the promotion of the petitioners as per the service rules and communicate the decision to the petitioners.

Final Decision: The court directed the official respondents to reconsider the promotion of the petitioners as per the service rules and communicate the decision to the petitioners.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjiv Khanna, J.

These two writ petitions by Surender Singh and Rajinder Kumar impugn a common order dated 3.5.2011 passed in OA No. 699/2011 filed by Narendra Kumar, the first respondent before us.

2. The first respondent was appointed as Sub-Inspector (Operations) in Delhi Police on 20.8.2004 as a direct recruit.

3. The Commissioner of Police had called for service records of the first respondent and the two petitioners for promotion to the post of Motor Transport Inspector (MT Inspector for short). The first respondent had objected. The contention was that, as per the Recruitment Rules (“RRs”), the two petitioners were not eligible and he was the only eligible candidate who could be considered for promotion to the post of MT Inspector.

4. The impugned order dated 3.5.2011 passed by the Tribunal has held that the petitioners were then not eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of MT Inspector, and the Commissioner of Police was directed to consider the first respondent for the said post on merits. The Tribunal, while passing the impugned order, has quashed and set aside two Notifications dated 24.9.2010 and 16.11.2010.

5. The grievance of the two petitioners is two-fold. Firstly, the petitioners were eligible for being considered for promotion to the post of MT Inspector. The second grievance is against quashing of the Notifications dated 24.9.2010 and 16.11.2010. It is submitted that the Commissioner of Police, while implementing the impugned order, had demoted the two petitioners.

6. We will begin by examining the first contention and notice the facts in respect of the petitioners:-

Surender Singh

(i) Surender Singh was appointed as temporary Constable (Executive) in Delhi Police on 1.8.1977. He was promoted as Head Constable (Executive) with effect from 30.10.1989.

(ii) Surender Singh was transferred from the Executive Cadre to Motor Transport Cadre as Head Constable/Motor Transport (Operations) with effect from 12.6.2003 by order of the same date as per Rule 17A(XV) of the Delhi Police (Appointment and Recruitment) (Amendment) Rules, 2002.

(iii) Surender Singh was promoted to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector/Motor Transport (Operations) with effect from 12.6.2008 after completion of five years of service as Head Constable/Motor Transport (Operations) under Rule 17A(XV) of the Delhi Police (Appointment and Recruitment) (Amendment) Rules 2004, vide order dated 25.9.2008. This promotion has not been set aside/quashed.

(iv) By another order dated 19.12.2005, the seniority of Surender Singh was re-fixed in the rank/cadre of Head Constable/Motor Transport (Operations) with effect from 30.10.1989, i.e., the date on which he was promoted as Head Constable (Executive) in the Executive Cadre.

(v) On the directions of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (“GNCTD”), vide letter dated 27.4.2010, Surender Singh was granted ante-dated seniority in the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector/Motor Transport (Operations) and was deemed to be promoted to the said post with effect from 30.10.1994 by the Police Headquarters (PHQ) Notification dated 24.9.2010. By another PHQ Notification dated 16.11.2010, Surender Singh was deemed to be promoted as Sub-Inspector/Motor Transport (Operations) with effect from 1.10.2002. As noted above, these two Notifications have been quashed by the Tribunal.

Rajinder Kumar:-

(i) Rajinder Kumar was appointed as Constable (Driver) in the Delhi Police on 28.10.1985. He was promoted as Head Constable (Driver) with effect from 1.1.1989.

(ii) Rajinder Kumar was permanently transferred from the Driver Cadre to Motor Transport Cadre as Head Constable/Motor Transport (Operations) with effect from 2.8.2004 vide PHQ order of the said date. This transfer and appointment as Head Constable/Motor Transport (Operations) was as per Rule 17A(XV) of the Delhi Police (Appointment and Recruitment) (Am














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
whatsapp-icon Back to top