JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mamdamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order of the second respondent herein passed in his Na.Ka.No.A2/9790/2010 dated 30.04.2010 and the Order of the first respondent herein passed in his Rc.No.A3/712/7839/2010 dated 31.07.2010 and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent herein to promote the petitioner as Special Sub-Inspector of Police with effect from 07.01.2010 with all consequential monetary and service benefits.)

The Writ Petition has been filed, challenging the order of the second respondent passed in his Na.Ka.No.A2/9790/2010 dated 30.04.2010 and the order of the first respondent passed in his Rc.No.A3/712/7839/2010 dated 31.07.2010, by which the request of the petitioner for promotion as Special Sub-Inspector of Police with effect from 07.01.2010, irrespective of he currency of punishment of Black Mark was rejected by the respondents. The petitioner also sought a direction to the first respondent to promote him as Special Sub-Inspector of Police with effect from 07.01.2010 with all consequential monetary and service benefits.

2. According to the petitioner, he joined the service as Grade-II Police Constable on 11.03.1976 and was promoted as Head Constable on 22.04.1998. Though he had completed 10 years of service as Head Constable as early as on 22.04.2008, in the promotion list to the cadre of Special Sub-Inspector of Police, his name did not find place. It is the case of the petitioner that he sent a representation dated 03.05.2010 to the 1st respondent with a request to promote him as Special Sub-Inspector of Police and since there was no response on the said representation, he was forced to file a Writ Petition in W.P.No.12846 of 2010, in which the 1st respondent was directed to dispose of the representation within eight weeks. Consequent to the said direction, the 1st respondent passed an order on 31.07.2010, rejecting his representation, on the ground that the punishment of black mark awarded vide P.R.No.1 of 2009 is in currency till 15.03.2011 and his request for promotion would be considered on completion of punishment period. It is the further case of the petitioner that as per G.O.Ms.No.368 Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 18.10.1993, black mark punishment has no currency for one year, though the punishment of censure has got one year currency. Therefore, it is pleaded that the impugned orders are unsustainable and liable to be set aside.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had received 45 rewards for his efficient service in his 34 years of service and the system of black mark is a common one in the Police Department, especially below the rank of Head Constable. Hence, the orders passed by the respondents in depriving promotion of the petitioner as Special Sub-Inspector of Police are without application of mind and need intervention by this Court.

4. Per contra, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents, by referring to the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, vehemently contended that black mark is also a punishment and since the petitioner was awarded with one such punishment on 12.02.2010 and the same was in currency as on the date of preparation of panel for promotion to the post of Special Sub-Inspector of Police, his name was not rightly included in the list, as, during the currency of punishment, there is no need to consider the name of the petitioner for promotion. In support of his contention, he also referred to G.O.Ms.No.368 P&AR (O) Department dated 18.10.1993 and G.O.Ms.No.937 Home (Pol.3) Department dated 21.07.1998. Thus, it is prayed that the Writ Petition is to be dismissed as devoid of merits.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material documents available on record, including the various Government Orders relied on by t