IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 7302 OF 2005
Prithivi Nath Ram ... ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. ... ... ... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR SINHA
-------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Kumar & V.N.Jha, Advocates
For the State : Mr. Vikash Pandey, J.C. to A.G.
-------
C.A.V. on 26.11.2008. Pronounced on 28.11.2008.
ORDER
5/ 28.11.2008
. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of an
appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding upon the respondents
to give promotion to the petitioner to the post of Deputy Superintendent
of Police with retrospective effect from 1.2.1993 with all consequential
benefits on the ground that the petitioner is holding the post of Deputy
Superintendent of Police, Ranchi Traffic with effect from 22nd of August,
2005.
2. The facts in brief are summarized as under;
The petitioner was appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police on
1.7.1976 on the basis of a competitive examination conducted by the
Bihar Police Service Commission, Patna, and pursuant to training at
P.T.C., Hazaribagh, he was posted to various districts and discharged his
duties with devotion and dedication.
The petitioner submits that he was rewarded for his good service
records on various occasions. He was also given cash award of Rs.500/-
for maintaining communal harmony. It is submitted that the petitioner
was promoted as Inspector of Police in the year 1982 and dealt with
many important matters and got the crime under control and maintained
law and order. His confidential record was equally excellent. According
to him he was recommended for President’s Police Medal. Based on the
recommendation the petitioner was awarded President’s Police Medal for
meritorious service on the occasion of Republic Day in the year 1996.
3. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that having been
awarded the President’s Police Medal, he was entitled to out-of-turn
promotion in accordance with Rule 660C of the Bihar Police Manual.
It is further submitted by the petitioner that his name was
recommended for such out-of-turn promotion in the year 1991 vide S.P.
Dhanbad’s Memo No. 1976 dated 19.8.1991 and the same was
recommended by the Deputy Inspector General, Bokaro but his case
2.
was turned down for out-of-turn promotion as per the Central Selection
Board held on 27.7.1995.
4. According to the petitioner, his name was again recommended for
out-of-turn promotion in 1995 but it was again turned down vide order
dated 22.11.1996 by the competent authority which, according to the
petitioner, is illegal and arbitrary and violative of Rule 660C of the Bihar
Police Manual. The petitioner has cited an example stating that out-of-
turn promotion was granted to one Raj Kumar Yadav.
The petitioner has further submitted that the Central Selection
Board held in between 9.11.1996 to 11.11.1996 again turned down the
claim of the petitioner for out-of-turn promotion, which was again
circulated vide Memo no. 8840 dated 4.12.1996.
5. The respondents have submitted in the counter-affidavit that vide
Notification bearing No. GSR-1463 dated 4.2.1989 Rule 660C of the
Bihar Police Manual in relation to out-of-turn promotion was amended
and the benefit of out-of-turn promotion was confined to the persons,
who had been awarded President’s Medal or Medal for Gallantry Award
and since the petitioner was only granted Police Medal he was not
entitled to out-of-turn promotion.
6. I have considered the pleadings and the rival contention/
arguments of the parties. At the very out set it is submitted that Clause
660C of the Jharkhand Police Manual only provides that the Selection
Board may recommend out-of-turn promotion to the officers with
outstanding records of service and competent authority may order such
promotion in deserving cases as they deem fit and proper with the
approval of the next higher authority. It also provides that the officers
so promoted should be placed below the officers of the approved
existing list of respective rank prepared by the Selection Boards. Apart
from this, there are five criteria laid down for out of turn promotion in
which one of the criteria is “Award of President’s Police Medal” and
“Indian Police Medal”, for gallantry and distinguished service.
7. It will be evident from reading the aforesaid provisions that it is
not a matter of legal, accrued and vested right to claim out-of-turn
promotion and even otherwise it is to be determined based on the
criteria laid down and it not mandatory but optional for the Selection
Board to consider and recommend such deserving cases based on merits
and the respective criteria. In any case, it is directory and not
mandatory because the word is ‘may’ and not ‘shall” and further it is a
selection based on five criterias as laid down.
3.
8. The prayer of the petitioner even otherwise is not sustainable
when he prays for issuance of a writ of mandamus or a direction
commanding upon the respondents to grant him promotion with
retrospective effect from 1.2.1993 when his own case is that he was
granted President’s Police Medal in the year 1996 and further his case
was considered by the Selection Board and the competent authority and
the Central Selection Board rejected his claim for out-of-turn promotion
on 27.7.1995 and again on 22.11.1996. The petitioner never challenged
those rejection orders or refusal to recommend his name for out-of-turn
promotion by the Central Selection Board twice which has, in any case,
attained finality and the present writ petition has been preferred in the
year 2005 without even challenging the aforesaid rejection order. The
petitioner himself submits that he was promoted as Dy.S.P. on
22.8.2005 and thus his claim for retrospective promotion to the post of
Dy.S.P. w.e.f. 1.2.1993 is not only illegal, unsustainable but without any
basis and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law when he has not even
held that post.
9. A Division Bench of the Patna High Court in 2005 (2) PLJR page-
230 (State of Bihar V. Janardan Prasad Singh) while considering the
same Rule 660C of the Bihar Police Manual, by a well considered
judgement held that out-of-turn promotion is an exception to the
general rule and the same cannot be claimed as a matter of right. It also
held that for promotion to the post of Dy.S.P. the rules also provide that
there has to be consultation with the Public Service Commission.
10. From perusal of Rules 645, 646, 724A and Appendix 71 and 72 it
is clear that no provision is there with regard to out-of-turn promotion to
the post of Dy.S.P. from the post of Inspector and even otherwise Rule
660C and its sub-sections in the Police Manual deals with out-of-turn
promotion up to the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police and not above.
11. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case,
this writ petition, being devoid of any merit, is accordingly dismissed but
without any order as to cost.
(Ajit Kumar Sinha,J.)
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi
Dated : 28.11.2008
D.S./ A.F.R.