SURESHSAIKIA Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counsel for the parties are agreed that both Civil Rule Nos. 2349/93 and 434/93 may be disposed of together. I order accordingly.

(2.) The two petitioners, it appears, had been clamouring for justice by claiming seniority over certain other police personnels and for consequential promotions including financial benefits. The records or the cases show that at one stage both the petitioners were shown senior in the seniority list dated 12th February, 1987. At a later point of time both the petitioners have been shown junior to certain persons who are not parties in this two petitions. The grievances of the petitioners are manifold. According to the petitioners, there were recruited before other police personnels Who have now been shown senior to them. Not only that further case of the petitioners is that they were appointed as Head Constables before other police personnels. It is needless to refer to other grievances of the petitioners which have been highlighted in the writ petitions lest any observation made by me may not mean an expression of opinion on the merits of the cases. Both these petitions, in my considered view, deserves to be disposed of by issuing necessary directions to the Inspector General of Police, Arunachal Pradesh to have a fresh look on the seniority of the two petitioners vis-a-vis other persons who have already been shown senior to the petitioners and which action has been subjected to challenge in these two petitions. It deserves to be noticed at this stage that the petitioners were asked by Respondent No.4 to file an objection petition which has already been done by the petitioners. However, in the objection petition all the grievances might not have been highlighted and, therefore, I am permitting the two petitioners to file fresh representations giving minute details. In the representations all the points would be listed. The Inspector General of Police, Arunachal Pradesh would serve forthwith persons likely to be affected by the passing of the order. The Inspector General of Police would discuss each and every point listed in the representations and pass a speaking and well reasoned order on all the points. These directions are being issued for the simple reason that the question of seniority which arises in the instant cases appears to be fairly contentious matter in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and keeping this in view such a senior officer is being entrusted with the job. The representations would be filed along with the certified copy of the order of this Court. The said representations would be decided at the earliest and preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of making of the representations after examining the entire records of the petitioners and other police personnels in accordance with Rules. If the petitioners are found entitled to the grant of relief, a specific order would be passed recording the date from which they are entitled to the grant of relief and if they are further entitled to the grant of financial benefit, that would also be done.

(3.) With the aforementioned directions the petitions are disposed of. It goes without saying that if the petitioners or any other persons are aggrieved against the order of the Inspector General of Police, Arunachal Pradesh, they would always be entitled to knock the doors of this Court again.