ORDER
Shanker Raju, Member (J)
1. Sub Inspector in Delhi Police impugns order dated 10.8.2005 whereby his request for out of turn promotion despite recommendation to the next higher rank on showing exemplary conduct, has been rejected.
2. Brief facts of the case transpire that the applicant has been recommended by the Deputy Commissioner of Police for out of turn promotion along with three other officers as the team of Special Cell has shot gangsters, who had kidnapped a person. The role of the applicant in his citation at Annedure-D has been enumerated as under:
On the IInd Floor, heavily armed underworld gangster later identified as Virender Pant & Chottu, took his position in the bathroom of one of the rooms and continued firing on the police party. Undeterred, ACP Rajbir Singh, Insp. Mohand Chand Sharma and SI Badrish Dutt in spite of being under heavy fire from Virender Pant, returned the fire. Exhibiting exemplary courage and bravery, they were able to neutralize Virender Pant and rescue Sh. Thekkat Sidhique from the clutches of the kidnappers. Simultaneously, one of the gangsters who had jumped on to the ground floor, started firing at the police team led by SI Sharat Kohli to pave the way for their escape. Putting his life at risk, SI Sharat Kohli returned the fire and blocked the passage leading to their escape, killing Sanjay Khanna @ Chunky, dreaded underworld gangster and his associate Sunil Nathani.
3. However, the Headquarters of Delhi Police recommended in its Committee a medal for gallantry to the applicant but ultimately applicant has been kept out of the purview of out of turn promotion despite the fact that the Deputy Commissioner of Police has applauded his gallantry act on 5.9.2003 whereby the other officers had been accorded the out of turn promotion and the applicant had been awarded with only President’s Police Medal for gallantry.
4. Respondents have taken a plea to leave out the case of the applicant for out of turn promotion on the ground that no active role has been played by the applicant to trace out the kidnappers and as he was not associated with investigation, the rejection is in accordance with rules.
5. Learned Counsel for applicant states that when the applicant has done an exemplary act at par with other members of the team and has faced spray of bullets and without risking his life confronted with the kidnapers, he has been deprived of the out of turn promotion, which is an invidious discrimination without any intelligible differentia and reasonable nexus with the object sought to be achieved and is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
6. On careful consideration of the rival contentions of the parties, out of turn promotion is awarded under Rule 19(ii) of Delhi Police (Promotion & Confirmation) Rules, 1980 in special circumstances when as a mark to encourage outstanding officials who have shown excellent gallantry to the duty with the prior approval of Administrator to the extent of 5% of the vacancies likely to fall vacant in the given year.
7. The defence raised by the respondents as to no active role played by the applicant is demolished by their own citation where it is clearly held that during the encounter, the applicant, who was on the second floor of the house, jumped from the shaft, returned the fire and bravely blocked the passage leading to their escape. The aforesaid recommendation culminated into Police Medal for gallantry to all the police officials but the applicant has not been accorded the out of turn promotion.
8. In our view, the gallantry shown by the applicant is not in the matter of surveillance but during the course of firing, the team had confronted with the kidnappers and blocked their way despite bullets fire. This brings the act of the applicant at par with the acts of others, including SI Badrish Dutt.
9. The act of the respondents cannot be so discriminatory as to make distinction between the equally placed persons. As SI Badrish Dutt and other police officials, who had been accorded out of turn promotion, including S/Shri Manoj Dixit, Govind Sharma and Brijender Singh when they have played the same role of greeting the hale of bullets fired by underworld gangsters. The same act performed by the applicant, by no logic or rationale, is different from their act of showing exceptional gallantry.
10. In such view of the matter, the order passed by the respondents, being a non-speaking order, rejecting his representation, plethora of reasons given in the reply would not supplement it.
11. In the result, we are of the considered view that there has been a non-application of mind in consideration of the case of the applicant for out of turn promotion. Accordingly, OA is allowed. Impugned order is set aside. Matter is remitted back to the respondents to reconsider the case of the applicant for out of turn promotion within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It, however, goes without saying that in case of promotion, the consequential benefits would ensue. No costs.