- (1.) HEARD Sri P.K. Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State.
(2.) THE petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Constable (Civil Police) on 28.01.2001. When the petitioner was posted at Police Station Hardi, District Bahraich, he faced the assailants with bravery in which he received serious injury and he was hospitalized on 28.01.2001. The Superintendent of Police Bahraich/Shrawasti vide letter dated 14.02.2001 recommended the name of the petitioner, as well as one Ram Gati Saroj, for providing the out turn promotion to the post of Head Constable. The Deputy Inspector of General of Police, Gonda sought certain clarification vide letter dated 03.03.2001 which was clarified by the respondent no. 5 by letter dated 24.03.2001 and recommended the name of the petitioner for out of turn promotion. The respondent no. 4 i.e. Deputy Inspector of General of Police, Gonda forwarded the name of Ram Gati Saroj to Inspector General of Police, Gorakhpur for providing out of turn promotion. The respondent no. 3, Vishesh Pradhikar Samiti has taken a decision providing out of turn promotion to Ram Gati Saroj for his bravery but the case of the petitioner has been rejected. The petitioner aggrieved by the conduct of the respondents approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 8533 (SS) of 2009 which was disposed of by order dated 23.12.2009 directing the appropriate authorities to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner. The respondent no. 3 D.I.G. vide orders dated 02.05.2010 rejected the case of the petitioner for out of turn promotion. The petitioner aggrieved by the said order, as well as, the order dated 23.01.2002 passed earlier by respondent no. 3 has approached this Court.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that for acts of bravery the State Government has provided for out of turn promotion and has issued Government Order dated 03.02.1994, which provides that recommendation for out of turn promotion shall be made by Superintendent of Police, through the Deputy Inspector General of Police to the Inspector General of Police and therefore respondent no. 3 shall take a decision. The petitioner along with Ram Gati Saroj performed acts of bravery and since Ram Gati Saroj has been given out of turn promotion the petitioner is also entitled to the same, as he was, also involved in the incident as well as the act of bravery. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents states that in pursuance of the order passed by the Court dated 23.12.2009 a fresh exercise was undertaken by the respondent no. 4 and comments was sought from the Senior Superintendent of Police. On the recommendation and comments made by the police officials the committee was of the opinion, that since, the petitioner succumbed to the miscreants and his service rifle was snatched by the miscreants and it was Ram Gati Saroj who has shown exemplary courage in rescuing the petitioner from the miscreants, as well as, recovered the rifle from them. The committee was of the opinion that it is Ram Gati Saroj who has shown courage whereas the petitioner was succumbed and over powered by the miscreants and had Ram Gati Saroj not saved him, probably the petitioner might have been killed.;