Back
S. N. PATHAK
Nawal Kishore Singh, son of Jogendra Prasad Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Prayers:
Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for direction upon the respondents to grant promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police (for short ‘Dy.S.P.’) as similarly situated persons and even below in rank to the petitioner have already been granted promotion to the said post but the petitioner though fulfills the requisite qualification and being eligible in all respects has been denied the said benefits.
Further prayer has been made for quashing part of the Order dated 11.12.2023, passed by the Departmental Promotion Committee of the Jharkhand Public Service Commission presided by its Chairman (respondent No. 5), whereby the petitioner has been deprived from promotion to the post of Dy.S.P. on the ground that in view of Order No. 99 of the Jharkhand Police Order, the number of Major and Minor Punishment is more than the number of Awards achieved by the petitioner.
Factual Matrix:
2. The petitioner was appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police and he joined the said post on 05.09.1994 in the State of Bihar. After bifurcation of the State, the services of the petitioner was allocated to the State of Jharkhand and since then, he was discharging his duties to the
Promotion cannot be denied solely based on the number of past punishments without considering their nature and timing, ensuring equal treatment under Article 14.
The penalty of censure does not bar promotion based on seniority-cum-merit criteria, allowing reconsideration for the post of Superintendent of Police.
Quashing of punishment has retrospective effect; employee gets promotion and financial benefits from juniors' promotion dates when delay due to employer's fault; 'no work no pay' inapplicable; incomp....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a petitioner, fully exonerated from a minor punishment, is entitled to be considered for promotion from the date when his juniors were promote....
Denial of promotion based on mere inquiry without formal charges is arbitrary and violates the right to be considered for promotion under Article 16(1).
Promotion rights under the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules are discretionary and not automatic; delay in seeking judicial relief may bar the petitioner's claims.
The right to be considered for promotion is a fundamental right, and the order of punishment imposed against the petitioner did not comply with the requirements of G.O.Ms.No.342, dated 04.08.1997.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that the provisions of the Office Memorandum dated 14th September, 1992, regarding the findings of the sealed cover and the imposition of penal....
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
