- (1.) THIS writ petition is remanded back by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 16.04.2011 passed in Special Appeal Defective No. 249 of 2011.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was a Constable having outstanding contribution towards sportsman activities. He achieved numerous Medals to his credit. So, as per the Government Order dated 19.01.1991, he was entitled for out of turn promotion to the post of Head-Constable, but the same was not granted. So, the petitioner has filed a Writ Petition No. 9519 (S/S) of 2006 (present one), where the Hon'ble Single Judge vide his order dated 24.11.2010 has given a direction that the parity in the case of Surendra Yadav vs. State of U.P. (Writ Petition No. 5040 (S/S) of 1997) may be given to the petitioner and he should be considered for the promotion within a period of six weeks. Being aggrieved, the State has filed the Special Appeal, where the Division Bench vide its order dated 16.04.2011 has remanded the matter back to the Hon'ble Single Judge for the reasons that the petitioner has already got a promotion on 30.10.2007 and the same was not mentioned in the order passed by Hon'ble Single Judge. Hence, once again, this writ petition is before this Court. With this backdrop, Sri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the Government Order dated 19.01.1991, the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of out of turn promotion. He is entitled for the parity of other similarly situated persons like the case of Surendra Yadav (supra). Learned counsel admits that the promotion was given to the petitioner in the year 2007, by virtue of the Government Order dated 07.02.2003, but the petitioner is entitled for the benefit according to the Government Order dated 19.01.1991. Lastly, he submits that to this effect numerous representations were submitted before the State Government, which are still pending.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned standing counsel submits that the petitioner has already got the promotion. Now, he is not entitled for any promotion otherwise the same would amount to double promotion. After hearing both the parties, it appears that undoubtedly, the petitioner was entitled for out of turn promotion by virtue of having the numerous medals to his credit and several features in his cap, as stated in the first para of the order passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge. But fact remains that in the year 2010, when the Hon'ble Single Judge has passed the order dated 24.11.2010, the petitioner has concealed the material facts that he has already got a promotion on 30.10.2007 under the outstanding sportsman quota. In other words, he has received out of turn promotion for his meritorious contribution towards sports activities in the year 2007, but the same was concealed from the Hon'ble Single Judge, when he has passed the order, that is why, the Division Bench of this Court in special appeal has remanded back the matter. Once the petitioner has not come with clean hands, the law will not help him as per the maximum ALLEGANS CONTRAIA NON EST AUDIE NDUS.;