M. Ramachandran, J. (Vice Chairman) - (1.) APPLICANT was an Assistant Sub Inspector (Driver) with the Delhi Police. He had started his career as a Police Constable and had later on qualified for promotion to the rank of Head Constable in 1989. He had submitted an application, on 22.03.2005 to the Joint Commissioner of Police claiming that he was entitled to be promoted to the rank of Assistant Sub Inspector from 01.01.1984, the date on which his colleagues had been promoted, but, however, had been informed that he could not be promoted as he was found unqualified in the test. Ultimately, it led him to file OA 2317/2005. In the course of the proceedings as above, the applicant had been promoted as ASI Driver with retrospective effect from 01.01.1984 and on 18.09.2006 the Original Application had been disposed of recording these developments. Taking notice of the submissions made on his behalf, while disposing the O.A., the Tribunal had also observed that if the applicant is eligible for any further promotion, and in the event any junior to him already had been given promotion, his case should also be considered and decision taken was to be communicated to him. By way of a review application, larger relief has been prayed for but the application had been rejected.
(2.) Consequent to the directions, the Deputy Commissioner had issued Annexure `A' order, on 31.01.2007 which reads as following: In pursuance of CAT's judgment dated 18.09.2006 passed in O.A. No. 2317/2005, the case of ASI (Dvr.) Khazan Singh No. 10137/DAP, 3662/D has been examined. The applicant has already been promoted to the rank of ASI (Dvr.) notionally w.e.f. 01.01.1984 vide notification No. 45230-46/CB-V dated 30.06.2006. However, during hearing of the O.A, he pleaded that he is also eligible for further promotion to the rank of SI (Dvr.). As per Rule 6 of Delhi Police (Promotion & Confirmation) Rules, 1980, each member of subordinate rank earns promotion in his cadre in accordance with the rules applicable to that cadre. Since no post of SI (Dvr.) is sanctioned in Delhi Police, hence, the plea/request of the applicant for further promotion could not be acceded to. ASI (Dvr.) Khazan Singh, No. 3662/D may please be informed accordingly. This is under challenge. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the stand adopted by the respondents, could not have been accepted, as he is put to a discriminatory treatment, and at least benefit, which had been extended to his colleagues, who were juniors, ought to have been conferred on him.
(3.) IN the application, he had cited the examples of one ASI Ramesh Chander, who, according to him, had been promoted as Sub INspector. Also he refers to the cases of Raj Kumar and Jai Prakash, who were in due course promoted in 1996 as MT Drivers. According to him, there were numerous such cases. His junior Head Constable Sat Narain and Constable Narender Kumar are now occupying the position of SI (MT) (Driver) and, therefore, applicant also could have been promoted as Sub INspector, without hiding under a technical plea as contained in the impugned order.;