Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AT AGARTALA
ARINDAM LODH, J.
Sri Pritish Bhattacharjee & 26 others – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tripura & 4 ors. - Respondents
WP(C) 582 of 2021
Decided on : 27-08-2021
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 14 and 16 - Tripura Police Services Rules, 1967 – Rules 14(4) and 34 - Post of TPS Grade-II - Promotion - Petitioners were not at fault in any manner to raise their claim for consideration of promotion in the post of TPS, Grade-II and they cannot be held responsible for the stalemate created by government itself - It manifests that ‘status quo’ order passed by the Supreme and consequential government decision stood in way of petitioners’ chances of promotion from being fairly considered when it was due for such consideration and I re-iterate that delay in taking exercise of such promotion made them ineligible for such consideration which fact respondents ought to have kept in mind while rejecting proposal of DGP to give one-time relaxation of age invoking Rule 34 of Rules, 1967.
Finding of the Court :
It manifests that ‘status quo’ order passed by the Supreme and consequential government decision stood in way of petitioners’ chances of promotion from being fairly considered when it was due for such consideration and I re-iterate that delay in taking exercise of such promotion made them ineligible for such consideration which fact respondents ought to have kept in mind while rejecting proposal of DGP to give one-time relaxation of age invoking Rule 34 of TPS Rules, 1967 - Court direct petitioners to submit a common representation to Government of Tripura, particularly, Secretary, General Administration (P&T) and Secretary, Home Department, Government of Tripura, to consider their promotion in post of TPS Grade-II invoking Rule 34 of Rules, 1967 for relaxation of age of 55 years, one-time measure, as contemplated under Rule 14(4) of Rules, 1967.
Result: Writ petition disposed of
ORDER :
By way of filing the present writ petition, all the petitioners who are serving as Inspectors of police and being eligible for promotion to the post of TPS Grade II have urged this court to direct the State-respondents to invoke the age relaxation Rules, as provided under Rule 14(4) of Tripura Police Services Rules, 1967 (for short, Rules 1967), in terms of Rule 34 of TPS Rules, 1967 for promotion to the said post from the post of Inspector of police, under Home Department, Government of Tripura.
2. From the statements made in the writ petition and as submitted by Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioners, it is surfaced that the State-respondents have recently initiated the process of promotion as Inspector from the post of TPS, Grade-II on adhoc basis and for this purpose, the State-respondents under notification dated 18th August, 2021 constituted a selection committee i.e. DPC (Annexure 5 to the writ petition) consisting of six Officers for consideration of promotion to the eligible Inspectors from the feeder post of Inspector of Police/Subedar of TSR battalions.
3. Prior to formation of said selection committee under notification dated 8th July, 2021, the State-respondents i.e. Deputy Secretary to the Government of Tripura issued a notification dated 22nd June, 2021 (Annexure 3 to the writ petition) wherein it was decided that:-
“5. Whereas, in order to augment efficiency of State administrations, the State Government has now decided to fill up posts lying vacant on ad hoc basis, pending final determination of appeal sub-judice before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India; thereby promoting eligible State Government employees on ad hoc basis in the interest of public service by following the process contemplated under the different recruitment rules regulating promotion criteria and procedures for such posts;
The petitioners herein being eligible for promotion to the post of TPS Grade II, but crossed the prescribed age of 55 years on 1st day of January, 2021, submitted representations to the Director General of Police, Government of Tripura on 07.07.2021 to consider their promotion to the rank of TPS Grade II, relaxing the age bar as prescribed in Rule 14(4) of the Rules, 1967. It is further stated that after 2013, the government of Tripura could not take any exercise for promotion to TPS Grade-II due to interim order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Director General of Police had duly considered the said representations and by his communication dated 8th July, 2021 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition) addressed to the Principle Secretary, General Administration (P&T), Government of Tripura, Agartala, proposed to consider one-time relaxation of age criteria, as specified in Rule 14 (4) of the TPS (14th amendment) Rules, 1967. Sub-rule (4) of Rule 14 of TPS Rules, 1967 may be extracted here-in-below:
“The committee shall not consider the cases of Officers in the feeder posts who have attained the age of 55 years on the 1st day of January of the year in which the Committee meets”.
4. The Director General of Police while making the proposal for relaxation of age to the Government of Tripura, had observed thus:
“4. It is seen that, as on 01/01/2021, 33 (thirty-three) Inspectors of Police who otherwise meet all the eligibility criteria had become 55 years or older, Annexure-A provides the entire list of these officers.
5. It may be noted that all the officers have rendered long years of service, including service for at least 5 years in the rank of Inspector. Due to maintenance of ‘status quo’ in matters of promotion in compliance with the interim order dated 27.07.2015 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, these officers had not considered for promotion to the next higher rank since last promotion in the rank of TPS Gr-II on 05/06/2013
6. At this stage when promotions are being resumed, depriving the above mentioned 33 Inspectors of Police from bei
SupremeToday
Service matter - Relaxation of age - Promotions - ‘Status quo’ order - All promotions in various departments under State-government were made stalled since 01.04.2017 only because of order of ‘status....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that petitioners cannot claim age relaxation based on alleged promises or inaction of the Government, and the court emphasized that the action of t....
Promotion among employees recruited through a common selection process must be governed by state-wide seniority based on the date of enlistment. Region-based seniority lists that result in arbitrary ....
The power of relaxation is within the exclusive domain of the State Government. The Court cannot strike down a policy decision taken by the Government merely because it feels that another policy woul....
Notional service from delayed appointment due to State error counts for IPS promotion eligibility via Rule 3 relaxation of 8-year requirement; mechanical rejection quashed, mandating Review Committee....
Promotion in public service must adhere to seniority principles, and arbitrary actions undermining this principle are impermissible.
Point of Law : The word used in the relaxation rules is "may" and therefore, the same would mean that relaxation may be given at the discretion of the competent authority.
The delay in holding Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for promotion to a higher post, without valid reason, can result in the affected party being unfairly disadvantaged and may warrant notiona....
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
