Out-of-turn promotion vacancies must be considered year-wise; clubbing across years without convening annual Incentive Committee is arbitrary, enlarges consideration zone, and violates equality principles.

ORDER

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

Since the issue in all these Original Applications is same, we propose to decide all the captioned OAs by this common order. However, for writing the present order, the facts are being taken from OA No. 478/2024 (Vijendra Singh) treating the same as the lead case.

2. The applicant is a citizen of India and is entitled to all fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. The applicant was appointed as Constable (Executive) in Delhi Police on 09.01.2010 and has since discharged his duties with utmost sincerity and dedication. Owing to his hard work and performance, he was promoted to the rank of Head Constable (Executive) on 30.12.2020. While serving as Head Constable, the applicant demonstrated exceptional devotion to duty by recovering 78 missing persons, including 41 children below the age of 14 years, 36 between the ages of 14 and 18 years, and one person above 18 years, within a short span of five months and nine days from 23.04.2022 to 02.10.2022, while posted at Police Station INA Metro, Delhi. His efforts were formally recognized through a citation dated 19.10.2022.

3. Based on this outstanding performance, the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Metro) verified and recommended the applicant’s name on 19.10.2022 for grant of out-of-turn promotion to the rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Executive) in accordance with Standing Order No. 252/2019 dated 28.06.2019, along with its addendums and Standing Order No. Crimes/18/2022 dated 12.04.2022. These standing orders provide that a Constable or Head Constable who recovers 60 or more missing children below 18 years, including at least 25 below 14 years, within 12 months, is eligible for consideration for out-of-turn promotion subject to availability of vacancies. The applicant fulfilled all eligibility criteria, was clear from vigilance angle, had no pending disciplinary or criminal proceedings, had not suffered any major penalty in the preceding three years or minor penalty in the last six months, and maintained consistently good to outstanding ACRs without adverse entries. His name was never included in any list of doubtful integrity, nor was he ever convicted of any offence involving moral turpitude.

4. The file pertaining to the applicant was duly processed and forwarded by the competent authorities on 20.10.2022. However, despite established practice of conducting an Incentive Committee meeting annually, no such meeting was held for the vacancy year 2022, even though more than 18 vacancies of Assistant Sub- Inspector under the out-of-turn promotion quota were available. Instead, the respondents deviated from established practice without justification and clubbed cases of 2022 and 2023 by calling for additional files of officers recommended in 2023. A combined Incentive Committee meeting was eventually held on 09.11.2023.

5. Pursuant to this meeting, promotions were granted on 11.11.2023 to several candidates, including those recommended later than the applicant, such as Rinku Singh and others recommended in 2023, while the applicant was ignored. It is further submitted that some candidates who were granted promotion did not even figure in the relevant teleprinter messages. The respondents thus failed to consider the applicant’s case in its proper chronological order and deprived him of promotion despite his superior and qualifying achievements.

6. The counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned action of the respondents