N.D. Ojha, J. - (1.) These two appeals raise identificial questions and hence are being decided by a common judgment.
(2.) The appellants are confirmed Sub-Inspectors in the Police department of the State of Uttar Pradesh. The next higher post to which a confirmed Sub-Inspector is entitled to be promoted is that of Circle Inspector. The procedure for such promotion is contained in the Police Regulations. The method of selection of Sub-Inspectors for promotion to the rank of Inspectors is provided in G.O. No. 6379 VIII-A dated November 5, 1965. Under the said G.O. a list is prepared by the Departmental Selection Committee of the candidates selected known as the Approved List. It is from this list that as and when necessity arises Sub-Inspectors are promoted either on officiating basis or in a substantive, capacity in the manner provided in the same G.O. The appellants were brought on the a foresaid approved list and subsequently were promoted in the year 1968 to officiate as Circle Inspectors. By an order dated 10th October, 1973. of the Departmental Selection Committee the names of the appellants were removed from the aforesaid list on the ground that they were found unsuitable. Subsequently by order dated 31st December, 1973, passed by the Superintendent of police concerned the appellants were reverted from the officiating post of Circle Inspector to that of Sub-Inspector. These two orders were challenged by the appellants in two writ petitions on the ground that their reversion amounts to reduction in rank and opportunity as contemplated by Article 311 of the Constitution of India not having been given to them the orders were liable to be quashed. The writ petitions were dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court. These two appeals have been preferred against the said judgment.
(3.) It was urged by the learned counsel for the appellants that since the names of the appellants had been removed from the approved list they ceased to be entitled to be considered for promotion as Circle Inspectors either in an officiating capacity or in a substantive capacity and the result of the order of reversion passed subsequently was that their chances of promotion stood postponed at any rate till their names were again brought back on the approved list. According to the learned counsel this amounted to reduction in rank and the opportunity contemplated by Article 311 not having been given to the appellants the order was vitiated.;