Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Sriniwas Rao – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
W. P. (S) No. 6836 of 2018
Decided on : 05-01-2024
POLICY - Out of Turn Promotion for Sportspersons - Police Order 219A/90 X.P. - The court discussed the discretionary nature of the policy for out of turn promotions for police personnel who excel in sports, emphasizing that while the policy is not a legal right, it must be applied uniformly and without arbitrariness. The court highlighted instances of past promotions granted from the date of winning medals, establishing that the petitioners were entitled to similar treatment under the same policy.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners, comprising coaches and sportspersons, sought out of turn promotions based on a police policy that rewards outstanding sportspersons in the police department. They argued that their promotions were delayed and not backdated to the date of their medal wins, unlike previous cases.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the policy for out of turn promotions was not being applied uniformly and that the petitioners had been denied promotions from the date of their medal wins without justifiable reasons. The court emphasized the need for non-arbitrariness in administrative actions.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to out of turn promotions effective from the date they won medals, and whether the policy was being applied arbitrarily.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that while the promotion policy is discretionary, it must be applied consistently and without discrimination. The arbitrary delay in granting promotions and the inconsistent application of the policy violated the principles of non-arbitrariness and equality under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to grant out of turn promotions to the petitioners from the date they won their medals, except for one petitioner who did not meet the eligibility criteria.
JUDGMENT :
GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
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 5th 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 t
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 central legal point established is that administrative actions must adhere to non-arbitrariness and policies should be applied evenhandedly without discrimination.
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.
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....
Out-of-turn promotions must be considered year-wise by Incentive Committee; clubbing vacancies across years without justification is arbitrary and violates equality principles.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
