Following reliefs are sought in this petition.

"It is therefore, prayed for the reasons submitted herein above and those to be urged at the time of arguments order impugned in the writ petition No. 187-HD of 1997 dated 30.05.1997 may very kindly be quashed and set aside to the extent it terminates the rights of seniority to the petitioner w.e.f 30.05.1997, by the issuance of a writ, order or direction in the na­ture of certiorari.

To command and direct the re­spondents to grant seniority to the petitioner as Dy. S.P w.e.f 30.05.1997 on the analogy and pattern as has been granted to Sh. Abdul Rashid Baba and Sh. Sewa Singh on the ba­sis of their respective dates of promo­tions, with all consequential benefits including promotions to the next higher grade, after re-fixing the senior­ity as Dy. S.P w.e.f 30.05.1997 by issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus."

2. Paragraph-? (a) of the writ petition is taken note of:-

"That the action of the respon­dents of treating the petitioner dif­ferently and unequally by vis-a-vis Shri Sewa and Abdul Rashid Baba, is discriminatory, illegal and wrong. Respondents are under an obligation and legal duty to treat the similarly situated and circumstanced persons with one yard stick. All Dy. S. Ps. granted out of turn promotion on the basis of their out of turn promotion have been bracketed in one group and entitled to the same treatment. This is the essence and spirit of the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution which guarantee equal­ity of law and equal protection of the laws to every citizens and similarly situated persons. Respondents have deliberately treated the petitioner dif­ferently and unequally vis-a-vis his other colleagues named above at the time of granting out of turn promotion of the petitioner regarding non-grant of seniority is arbitrary and illegal and is unsustainable in the eyes of law. The respondents cannot treat the petitioner with a different yard stick in view of the provisions of equality contained in part-in of the Constitu­tion."

3. Paragraph-12 of the rejoinder affi­davit filed by the petitioner is taken note of:-

“That just after less than three years one more promotion was granted to the two officials of the C.M. Security vide Order dated 8.7.1999 whereby Mr. A.R Baba was promoted as S.P from Dy. S.P and N.P Singh Dy. S.P from Inspector. To appreciate the du­plicity of the respondents made in their counter affidavit it deserves to be noted that for the post of S.P by way of promotion minimum experi­ence required in terms of the Police Gazetted services is five years while as Mr. A. R. Baba had only less than three as Dy. S.P then how was he pro­moted when in case of the petitioner they have maintained that the peti­tioner had not required five years services as inspector to be promoted as Dy. S.P. Secondly Mr. N. P Singh was promoted as Inspector by way of out of turn promotion on 24.12.1996 and on 8.7.99 had less than three years service as Inspector then how was he promoted as Dy. S.P which shows without any doubt that it is only in case of the petitioner that this frivolous plea has been raised otherwise the law is that once out of turn promotion is granted in relaxation of the normal rules this bogies plea of required experience cannot be agitated that why above mentioned officials were promoted. Their can't be two sets of rules in the same State and the organization. Copy of the said order is appended as annexure R/8 to this rejoinder."

4. Paragraph-5 of the reply affidavit filed by respondents is taken note of:-

"That it is further submitted that the case of the petitioner and those of Ab. Rashid Baba and Sewa Singh Monkotia are dissimilar and not tmalogou. In the case of Ab. Rashid Baba and Sewa Singh Monkotia both had completed the minimum length of requisite service of five years as Inspector besides their cases and achievements forwarded by PHQ in the form of dossiers with recommen­dations were thoroughly examined in the Hom

Click Here to Read the rest of this document