Out-of-turn promotions must be considered year-wise by Incentive Committee; clubbing vacancies across years without justification is arbitrary and violates equality principles.

ORDER

Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J):

The issue in all these Original Applications is the same and hence with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, all the captioned OAs have been heard together and are being disposed of this common order. However, for writing the present order, the facts are being taken from OA No. 180/2024 (Anil Kumar) treating the same as the lead case.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the Applicant is a citizen of India and is entitled to all fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of India. He was appointed as Constable (Executive) in Delhi Police on 20.03.2006 and has been discharging his duties diligently. Owing to his consistent hard work and performance, he was promoted to the rank of Head Constable (Executive) on 01.08.2015. While serving in the said capacity, particularly during his posting at the ACP Office, CR Park, the Applicant demonstrated exceptional devotion to duty by recovering 70 missing children/persons within a short span of two months from 18.07.2022 to 19.09.2022, which included 29 children below the age of 14 years and 41 between the ages of 14 and 18 years. His commendable work was formally recognized through a citation dated 23.09.2022. Subsequently, the DCP, South District verified and recommended his case for grant of Out of Turn Promotion to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Executive) on 23.09.2022 in accordance with Standing Order No. 252/2019 dated 28.06.2019 read with Standing Order No. Crimes/18/2022 dated 12.04.2022, which prescribe that recovery of 60 or more missing children below the age of 18 years, including at least 25 below the age of 14 years within a period of 12 months, makes an officer eligible for such promotion subject to availability of vacancies.

3. It is submitted that the Applicant fulfilled all eligibility conditions and was also clear from vigilance angle, with no pending criminal case, departmental inquiry, suspension, or complaint against him. He had not been awarded any major penalty in the preceding three years nor any minor penalty of censure in the last six months. His Annual Confidential Reports for the last three years were graded as Outstanding, Very Good, or Good, with no adverse entries, and his name was never included in the secret list of doubtful integrity. All requisite documents including vigilance clearance were duly submitted to the competent authority. As per established practice, the Incentive Committee meeting is held annually to consider such cases; however, the respondents failed to conduct the meeting for the vacancy year 2022 despite the availability of more than 18 vacancies earmarked for Out of Turn Promotion in the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector.

4. Instead, the respondents deviated from the settled practice without any justifiable reason and clubbed the vacancies of the years 2022 and 2023. They called for additional files of candidates recommended in 2023 and considered them along with the Applicant in the Incentive Committee meeting held on 09.11.2023. As a result, several candidates whose names were recommended subsequent to the Applicant, including those recommended in 2023, were granted Out of Turn Promotion to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Executive) vide order dated 11.11.2023, while the Applicant was arbitrarily denied the same. The Applicant submits that his case ought to have been considered first in accordance with the year-wise vacancy and recommendation, and only thereafter should the cases of subsequent candidates have been