AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH - (1.) PETITIONER has, through this writ petition, impugned the promotion order of respondents No. 6 to 8 as Inspectors dated 03.12.2008 (Annexure P-20) passed by the Inspector General of Police, Hisar Range, Hisar-respondent No. 3 as the petitioner claims to be senior to them. PETITIONER has also impugned order dated 21.01.2006 (Annexure P-14), vide which petitioner has been transferred from District Police Hisar to Haryana Armed Police with a further challenge to the order dated 27.01.2006 (Annexure P-15) passed by the Inspector General of Police, Haryana Armed Police (hereinafter referred to as `HAP'), Madhuban, vide which the dates of placement in the promotion List-C, promotion as Head Constable, Confirmation as Head Constable and placing him in the promotion List-D and promotion as ASI, have been changed to his detriment and his seniority has been fixed as per the Haryana Armed Police in violation of Rule 12.1 (4) of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934.
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner contends that once the petitioner has been absorbed in Hisar Range, his lien in HAP, Madhuban ceased and he has rightly been granted seniority and promotion in Hisar Range, which cannot now be disturbed by the respondents in purport of compliance with the order passed by this Court in CWP No. 934 of 1995 titled as Kanwar Singh vs. State of Haryana and others. Reliance has also been placed upon the instructions dated 22.09.2006 (Annexure P-22) to consolidate his contention that the cadre of constables enlisted with HAP/Commando, who had been transferred to District Unit permanently, be treated as such. He has further relied upon Rule 3.12 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume-I, Part-I, which deals with the lien and its termination as also upon a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of T.R.Sharma vs. Prithvi Singh and another, AIR1976 Supreme Court 367 and a Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in CWP No. 7478 of 2008 titled as Narender Kumar vs. State of Haryana, decided on 18.08.2008. Support with regard to his this contention has also been sought from Rule 12.1 (4) of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. Accordingly, it has been prayed that the impugned orders being violative of the statutory Rules governing the service deserves to be quashed. He has further prayed that by quashing the orders dated 21.01.2006 and 27.01.2006 (Annexures P-14 and P-15 respectively), he be promoted to the post of Inspector from the date his juniors have been promoted as Inspectors i.e. w.e.f. 03.12.2008. On the other hand, counsel for the respondents submits that as per Rule 12.4 of the Punjab Police Rules, cadre of the Head Constables is to be borne on the district rolls. The petitioner was enlisted as a Constable in HAP/Madhuban and was brought on promotion List-C-I of Head Constables w.e.f. 18.09.1984 and confirmed as Head Constable on 31.01.1988 there. Thereafter, he was transferred to District Police, Gurgaon and from there to Bhiwani. Since the petitioner belongs to HAP Cadre/Madhuban as he was confirmed as a Head Constable there, even if he is transferred from HAP to the District Police, his lien would remain with HAP Range, Madhuban. The report submitted by the Deputy Inspector General, HAP, Madhuban dated 26.05.2003 was contrary to the statutory Rules and accordingly, the benefits conferred on the petitioner vide order dated 11.06.2003 (Annexures P-8 and P-9) order dated 12.06.2003 (Annexure P-10) and order dated 13.06.2003 (Annexure P11) being violative of the statutory Rules governing the service cannot be upheld and do not confer any right on the petitioner. Reliance has also been placed upon a Memo dated 15.12.1995 issued by the Director General of Police, Haryana (Annexure R-3), wherein while dealing with the similar situation as in the present case, it was clarified by the Director General of Police that Head Constables, who are confirmed in a particular Range under normal circumstances, if transferred, will be treated as on deputation and will retain their original seniority in the parent Range from where they were transferred and their promotion will be affected according to their seniority in their parent Range. It has further been contended that the order of his transfer and fixation of the seniority of the petitioner has been passed in compliance with the order passed by this Court in CWP No. 934 of 1995, Head Constable Kanwar Singh's case (supra) where petitioner was impleaded as respondent No. 6. Prayer has been made for dismissal of the writ petition.
(3.) I have heard the counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case.;