IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
V. Kameswar Rao, Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, JJ.
Commissioner of Police & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Harinder Singh - Respondent
W.P.(C) 6989 of 2017 and W.P.(C) 8060 of 2017
Decided On : 31-10-2023
Out of Turn Promotion - Delhi Police - Delhi Police Act, Section 482 of Cr.P.C. - The case involves the denial of 'Out of Turn Promotion' to a constable in the Delhi Police force, despite his exemplary performance and the quashing of criminal proceedings against him. The court found that the denial of promotion was discriminatory and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The court held that the petitioner was entitled to equivalent benefits conferred upon another constable and directed the authorities to implement the promotion from the date of filing of proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a constable in the Delhi Police, was denied 'Out of Turn Promotion' despite exemplary performance and the quashing of criminal proceedings against him. He filed a representation and subsequently a writ petition challenging the denial of promotion.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the denial of promotion was discriminatory and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The court held that the petitioner was entitled to equivalent benefits conferred upon another constable and directed the authorities to implement the promotion from the date of filing of proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Issues: The main issue was the denial of 'Out of Turn Promotion' to the petitioner despite his exemplary performance and the quashing of criminal proceedings against him. The court also considered the significance of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and the principles of fairness and reasonableness in granting promotions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the denial of 'Out of Turn Promotion' to the petitioner was discriminatory and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The court emphasized that the petitioner was entitled to equivalent benefits conferred upon another constable and directed the authorities to implement the promotion from the date of filing of proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions and upheld the order passed by the Tribunal, directing the authorities to implement the promotion of the petitioner from the date of filing of proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No costs were awarded.
JUDGMENT
Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, J.
1. Separate Writ Petitions have been preferred by both, the petitioner Harinder Singh as well as respondents Commissioner of Police & Ors. challenging the impugned order dated January 20, 2017 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter, referred to as the `Tribunal') in O.A.No.2936/2012. For sake of convenience, Harinder Singh and Commissioner of Police & Ors. are referred as petitioner and respondents respectively as appearing in the O.A. W.P.(C) No.8060/2017 has been preferred by Harinder Singh/petitioner against the impugned order dated January 20, 2017 since the O.A.No.2936/2012 preferred by him was allowed granting him ``Out of Turn Promotion'' as Head Constable only with effect from the date of filing of the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the High Court of Delhi, whereby the criminal proceedings pending against him were quashed but was denied the benefit of promotion w.e.f. June 03, 2003 as granted in the case of Constable Joginder Singh by the respondents.
On the other hand, W.P.(C) No.6989/2017 has been preferred by the respondents/Commissioner of Police PHQ & Ors., challenging the impugned order dated January 20, 2017 passed by the Tribunal whereby the O.A. No.2936/2012 was allowed in favour of the petitioner in terms of para 17.
2. In brief, the case of the petitioner (Harinder Singh) is that he was enlisted in Delhi Police as Constable (Executive) on October 26, 1998. During his short stint in the Special Staff, South District, he alongwith Constable Joginder Singh and other team members under the supervision of Inspector Rajender Singh, the then Incharge, Special Staff, South District started keeping track of movement of the criminals released recently from the jail. Further, the petitioner alongwith Constable Joginder Singh and team members laid a trap and arrested the notorious snatchers on July 09, 2002. At the instance of an accused, the jeweller who was the receiver of the stolen property was also arrested. With the arrest of two snatchers, South District Police solved about 114 cases of murder, attempt to murder, robbery and snatching etc. and also recovered the stolen articles. Subsequently, they also nabbed five members of Jaswant - Babbe Gang on October 05, 2002 from Sheikh Sarai, Malivya Nagar reflecting exemplary courage. In lieu of exemplary performance of the petitioner, DCP, South District recommended the name of the petitioner alongwith Constable Joginder Singh for `Out of Turn Promotion' to the rank of Head Constable vide citation dated December 16, 2002. On the basis of citation and recommendation of Incentive Committee, Commissioner of Police approved grant of `Out of Turn Promotion' to the rank of Head Constable to Constable Joginder Singh vide order dated June 03, 2003. However, the name of the petitioner was not recommended by the Incentive Committee since he was involved in FIR No.360/2000 registered under Sections 452/323/506 IPC at PS: Hauz Khas, Delhi and the proceedings were pending.
3. It is further the case of the petitioner that pursuant to quashing of the aforesaid FIR vide order dated February 04, 2011 by the High Court, an order dated March 07, 2011 was issued by the respondents to the effect that no departmental action is warranted against the petitioner and his name be removed from the list of police personnel against whom criminal cases are shown as pending.
4. A detailed representation was thereafter made by the petitioner to the Commissioner of Police for grant of `Out of Turn Promotion' to the post of Head Constable (Executive) in the year 2011. The respondents vide order dated June 14, 2012 instead of granting `Out of Turn Promotion' to the petitioner, awarded him `Asadharan Karya Puraskar' with cash reward of Rs.10,000/-, though vide aforesaid order, several other staff members were granted `Out of Turn Promotion'.
5. Aggrieved against the denial of `Out of Turn Promotion' in terms of order
Ajay Pal Singh v. Lt. Governor and Ors.
Devender Kumar v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the denial of 'Out of Turn Promotion' must be reasonable, fair, and non-discriminatory. The court emphasized the principle of equality under A....
Out-of-turn promotions are discretionary rewards, not entitlements; entitlement depends on the merit and substantive evaluation of performance.
Denial of out of turn promotion to team leader in gallantry encounter, while granting to subordinates without reasoned distinction, is arbitrary and violates Articles 14/16; reconsideration mandated ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that public posts cannot be filled by candidates who do not meet the eligibility criteria as per the applicable rules. The court emphasized that il....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.