SRI B. GEORGE Vs. I.G. OF POLICE
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Sri B. George
I.G. OF POLICE
Click here to view full judgement.
K. Ramachandra Rao, J. -
(1.) - In this writ petition the petitioner asks for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents herein to consider the petitioner's case for promotion to the post of Inspector of Police. The petitioner states that he is a confirmed Sub Inspector of Police, that he has successfully for being appointed as Circle Inspector of Police, that he has successfully completed the requisite training, that he was also included in the list of qualified candidates for promotion as Inspector of Police which is known as the "C" list, but that when the matter came up for consideration the petitioner was not given a posting on the ground that an inquiry was pending against him before, the Disciplinary proceedings Tribunal in T.E.C. 32 of 1970, that some of his juniors have been promoted that this failure on the part of the respondents to consider the petition and for promotion on the aforesaid ground is illegal and unsustainable and that the deferring of the consideration of his case for promotion amounts to imposition of punishment even before the charges against the petitioner are established. The Government have filed a counter affidavit admitting that the petitioner is a confirmed Sub Inspector of Police and is included in the 'C' list of persons fit for promotion as Circle Inspector of Police. But it is stated that in view of the pendency of the enquiry before the Disciplinary Proceeding Tribunal the promotion of the petitioner was withheld, that the case of the petitioner for promotion would be reviewed after the conclusion of the said proceedings before the Tribunal and that the promotion of the juniors was made without Prejudice to the Seniority of the petitioner.
(2.) The short question for consideration is whether the respondents are justified in law in deferring the consideration of the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Circle Inspector of Police on the sole ground that a case before the Disciplinary proceedings Tribunal is pending against him. No provision of Statute or any rule has been brought to my notice under which the Government can postpone or defer the consideration of the Government Servant's case for promotion on the sole ground that the charges were pending enquiry. As observed by the judgement of this Court in W.P. No. 496 of 1970 (M. Ram Singh v. the Government of Andhra Pradesh and another) the deferring of the promotion amounts to imposition of punishment even before the charges are established in the enquiry and that the failure to consider the case of such Government Servants for promotion would amount to denial of the right under Article 16 of the Constitution. In the counter filed it has not been disclosed as to at what stage the enquiry stands. It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the enquiry is still at the preliminary stage. In the circumstances of the case, I do not think the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Circle Inspector of Police can be justified in law. The writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Circle Inspector of Police and pass appropriate orders. The writ petition is accordingly allowed with costs. Advocate's fee Rs. 100/-.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.