Hon'ble KOTHARI, J.—The present petitioner Drawar Singh S/O Bhakar Singh working as Sub-Inspector of Police has preferred this writ petition claiming an "out of turn promotion" against the 10% reserved vacancies for the year 2006-2007 under Rule 28 of the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 which is enacted to reward the police personnel who perform the outstanding and extra ordinary acts of courage in discharge of their duties and with their outstanding caliber in the fields like anti-dacoity or anti-smuggling or any special field of police work including performance in games and sports and 10% of next higher posts can be reserved for such "out of turn promotion" as per Rule 28 of the Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989.

2. The recommendations of the Superintendent of Police, Jodhpur (Rural) were made vide letter Annex.1 dtd. 5.4.2007 recommending the case of the petitioner for such out of turn promotion on the various grounds like catching and arresting a known dacoit Rania, saving of six lives on 11.7.2001 in a flooding and overflowing river at 6.45 a.m., preventing the communal riots at Swaroopganj at the period of time when ill-famous Godhra riots took place in the nearby State of Gujarat and various other incidents. In as many as 10 such incidents were narrated by the Superintendent of Police, Jodhpur (Rural) after due verification for recommending the case of the petitioner for the out of turn promotion to the next higher post of Inspector. The petitioner upon not being considered for the same had earlier approached this Court by way of writ petition No. 119/2009- Derawar Singh vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors., which writ petition came to be disposed of by the coordinate bench of this Court on 4.1.2011 remanding the case back, for consideration afresh at the hands of Director General of Police showing the due application of mind by him to the facts of the case of the petitioner. It appears that even upon a reconsideration also, the Committee framed by the Director General of Police found the petitioner's case as not fit to grant him the "out of turn promotion" to the next higher post of Inspector and accordingly, his case was rejected and communi-cation Annex.5 dtd. 26.7.2011 was sent to him in which 4 out of such 10 incidents on the basis of which recommendations were made by the Superin-tendent of Police only were narrated and it was conveyed to the petitioner that since cash awards and appreciation certificates were given to him during the relevant point of time for such exemplary works done by him, therefore, out of turn promotion claimed by him cannot be granted. Being aggrieved by this order, the petitioner again approached this Court by way of present writ petition in the second round of litigation which was filed on 18.10.2011.

3. Upon the issuance of notices, the respondents have filed reply to the writ petition and have tried to defend the impugned order.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Shreyansh Mardia submitted that not only the consideration at the hands of Director General of Police has not taken place independently and properly, but from the copy of `Office Note' obtained by the petitioner under the provisions of Right to Information Act, it is clear that while the other police personnel with much lesser exemplary works done by them have been awarded such `out of turn promotion' under Rule 28 of the 1989 Rules, for the petitioner somehow, the Committee albeit Director General of Police himself was supposed to consider his case, rest contended by observing that since he has been given the cash awards and the appreciation certificates, the `out of turn promotion' cannot be given to him, as he has not done any outstanding work in the form of anti-dacoity or anti-smuggling or any special field of police work. The Director General of Police, vide office note No. 152 merely says that "report of the committee approved". He, therefore, submitted that there is no independent a