IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Sriniwas Rao – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
W.P. (S) No. 6836 of 2018
Decided On : 05-01-2024
Out of Turn Promotion - Police Department - Police Order 219A/90 X.P. - Summary
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners, coaches and sportspersons, sought out of turn promotion as per Police Order 219A/90 X.P. for winning National Sport Event. They claimed belated promotion and pending consideration for promotion.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the policy aimed to encourage sportspersons and had granted out of turn promotion in the past. It held that the petitioners were entitled to promotion from the date of winning the medal, and the arbitrary exercise of discretion in granting promotions was against the principles of non-arbitrariness.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners were entitled to promotion from the date of winning the medal and if the discretionary nature of the policy allowed for arbitrary exercise in granting promotions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that administrative actions cannot be exercised in an arbitrary manner and must adhere to non-arbitrariness in administrative action flowing from Article 21 of the Constitution. It also highlighted the requirement of applying policies evenhandedly without discrimination.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to extend the benefit of out of turn promotion with consequential benefits from the date of winning the Gold medal to the petitioners, except for one petitioner who did not fulfill the eligibility criteria.
1. Petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are Coaches whereas petitioner nos. 3 to 17 are the sport persons who won National Sport Event. Their grievance is that they have not been given out of turn promotion as per the Police Order 219A/90 X.P. issued by the Director General of Police, Bihar. This policy has been adopted by the State of Jharkhand vide Letter No. 879/G dated 09.09.2011 of the office of Director General of Police and Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for direction to the respondents-Police Authorities to consider their cases for out of turn promotion in the light of the policy as stated above.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that under the stated policy to encourage the sport persons serving the department of police from time to time, the officers and men of the police department have been given out of turn promotion from the date when they won medal for the State. Reference is made to one Santosh Kumar Singh, Constable, who was the winner of Gold Medal in the All India Basket Ball Championship held from 14.02.1999 to 25.02.1999. He was granted promotion to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector on 18.05.2006 with effect from 25.02.1999. It was not the solitary case, but also Dev Kumar Rao, Constable, Rajeshwar Prasad Verma, Assistant Sub Inspector and Krishna Kumar Sharma, Constable, were granted promotion w.e.f. 17.02.1997, 08.11.1997 and 11.01.1998 respectively vide office order dated 06.04.1998. Other cases have also been cited where performing sport persons have been given out of turn promotion.
4. The main contention of the petitioners is that petitioner nos. 3 to 17 have been belatedly granted promotion, but not from the date they won medals.
5. With respect to petitioner no. 1 it is submitted that although he has been found fit for promotion as Coach and fulfills the requisite criteria but his case is pending for consideration by the Departmental Promotion Committee for last six years and two months. The team represented by the petitioner no. 1, had won gold medal in 66th All India Police Volleyball Cluster Chaimpionship-2017 held on 10.10.2017 to 14.10.2017, in which he was coach of the team.
6. Mr. Jai Prakash, learned AAG-1A, appearing for the respondents, has not disputed the police notification by which out of turn promotion was granted in past to outstanding sport persons in the police department. What is contested, however, is the claim for promotion from the date of their wining medal. It is argued that the policy does not lay down any legal right and is discretionary in nature. In almost all the cases promotions have been granted from the date of the order and not from the date of promotion. Only in one case of Santosh Kumar Singh out of turn promotion was granted effective from the date when he won medal for the State. With regard to the case of Dev Kumar Rao, Constable, Rajeshwar Prasad Verma, Assistant Sub Inspector, and Krishna Kumar Sharma, Constable, it is submitted that the notification does not mention that they have been granted promotion from the date they won medal for the State. As far as petitioner no. 2 is concerned, he is not a trained coach of National Institute of Sports (NIS) and, therefore, he is not eligible for promotion under the Scheme.
7. After having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both sides, it is apparent that in the light of the policy of the Government to encourage the sport persons from time to time, out of turn promotion has been granted to the police personnel. The main question before this Court is whether the petitioners are entitled to promotion with effect from the date of winning the medal or not.
8. It has been contended on behalf of the State that since the incentive in the form of promotion is a part of policy. Therefore, no right inheres in the petitioners to claim promotion, and far less promotion from the date they won medal. There are, h
Ramana Dayaram Shetty vs. International Airport Authority of India
The central legal point established is that administrative actions must adhere to non-arbitrariness and policies should be applied evenhandedly without discrimination.
The principle of non-arbitrariness in administrative actions requires that policies, once established, must be applied uniformly and without discrimination, particularly in matters affecting rights a....
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....
Participation in events does not equate to outstanding performance necessary for out of turn promotion; evidence of exceptional achievement is required.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that promotions should be based on merit and not be arbitrary or discriminatory.
Out-of-turn promotion vacancies must be considered year-wise; clubbing across years without convening annual Incentive Committee is arbitrary, enlarges consideration zone, and violates equality princ....
Out-of-turn promotion vacancies in police must be considered year-wise; clubbing across years without convening annual Incentive Committee is arbitrary, enlarges consideration zone, and violates Arti....
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....
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.