The central legal point established in the judgment is that the mere pendency of a criminal case cannot be a ground for denying promotion, and the subsequent service record of the petitioner should be considered in such cases.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Vijay Gautam, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Atipriya Gautam, learned counsel for petitioner and learned standing counsel for State-respondents.

2. Pleadings have been exchanged between the parties, with the consent of the parties, the instant writ petition is being finally decided at the admission stage.

By way of present petition, petitioner is seeking following reliefs:-

“(ii) issue, a writ order or direction, in the nature of certiorari, quashing the impugned order dated 12.08.2021, passed by respondent No. 1, enclosed as Annexure-1, to the writ petition.

(iii) issue, a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, commanding the Respondent Authorities, to open the Seal Cover Envelop and promote the petitioner on the post of Dy.S.P. in pursuance of the Government Order No. 13/21/89-Ka-1-1997, dated 28/05/1997, & Government Order No. 1/2018-13(6)/2017/Ka-1-2018, dated 09/01/2018, with all consequential benefits.

(v) issue, a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, commanding the Respondent Authorities, to consider the claim of the petitioner for Ad-hoc promotion on the post of Dy.S.P., in pursuance of the Government Order No. 13/21/89-Ka-1-1997, dated 28/05/1997, & Government Order No. 1/2018-13(6)/2017/Ka-1-2018, dated 09/01/2018, with all consequential benefits.”

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that petitioner was appointed on the post of Sub-Inspector in Civil Police Department on 17.09.1990. While petitioner was posted at Jaunpur, an F.I.R. has been lodged by one Chhedi Lal against three persons namely Jagarnath Chaudhary, Asha Devi and mother of Asha Devi namely Babana Devi, which was registered as Case Crime No. 172 of 1999 u/s 302, 201, 506 IPC at Police Station Jaunpur, District Jaunpur on 05.06.1999, in which petitioner was not named. Ultimately, charge sheet was submitted in the year 1999, in which petitioner was also charge sheeted under section 217, 218, 201 & 120-B IPC whereas against other accused, charge sheet has been submitted under sections 302, 201, 506, 217, 218 IPC. Feeling aggrieved by the said charge sheet, petitioner has filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 6323/2003 (U/s 482 Cr.P.C.), in which this Court vide order dated 10.09.2003 was pleased to stay the further proceedings, which continued upto year 2020.

4. It is further submitted that during the pendency of the said criminal proceeding, petitioner was given out of turn promotion on 14.09.2006 on the post of Inspector, till then he is performing his duty to the full satisfaction of the authorities and no other disciplinary or criminal proceeding has ever been initiated against him. It is next submitted that meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee (in short, ‘DPC’) was held on 01.01.2018 for promotion on the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police, in which case of petitioner was also considered, but due to pendency of criminal proceeding, his name was kept in a sealed cover envelop and juniors to petitioner were granted promotion. Thereafter, meeting of DPC was also held in the years 2020 & 2021 and other juniors to petitioner have also been promoted.

5. It is next submitted that when the name of petitioner was kept in a sealed cover envelop, petitioner has filed Writ Petition No. 7758 of 2019, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 07.02.2020 directing respondent No. 1 to decide the representation of petitioner. Thereafter, comments were called from the Additional Director General of Police, Administration (hereinafter referred to as “ADGP, Administration”) and vide communication dated 20.08.2020, comments were sent to Secretary Home (Police Services), Secretariat U.P., Lucknow and in the comments, it is mentioned that since last ten years, petitioner was awarded excellent entries and never been penalized either major or minor penalty. It was also stated in the comments that character role of petitioner is excellent and after promotion on the post of Inspe