Alok Sharma, J. - (1.) CONTEMPT of the order dated 03.12.2013, passed by this Court, has been alleged in this contempt petition. Thereunder this Court held that the denial of promotion to the petitioner under Rule 28(a) of the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989 (hereinafter 'the Rules of 1989') only on account of punishment of censure was arbitrary. Consequently, the order of denial as aforesaid passed on 30.11.2007 was quashed and the matter was remanded to the competent authority to reconsider the case of the petitioner for special promotion under Rule 28(a) of the Rules of 1989 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the court's order.
(2.) MR . Rohitash Mishra, son of the petitioner appears in person and states that the purport of the order dated 03.12.2013 passed by this Court more particularly in the context of the words "resultantly the writ petition is allowed and stands disposed of" was that on reconsideration, the petitioner was of necessity to be granted promotion with reference to Rule 28(a) of the Rules of 1989. He submitted that now the petitioner has again been arbitrarily, unfairly and mala fide denied promotion albeit on different grounds which were not in existence at the time of earlier order dated 30.11.2007 when the petitioner was denied promotion on the ground of suffering punishment of censure. He submits that it is thus evident that the entire exercise of reconsideration undertaken by the respondents under directions of this Court was a sham with a pre -determined mind to somehow reject the petitioner's right to fair consideration for special promotion under Rule 28(a) of the rules of 1989. This according to him constitutes contempt. Mr. Bhairu Lal Meena, Additional S.P., Civil Rights, Police Headquarter, Jaipur present in person has drawn the attention of this Court to the reply filed to the contempt petition which was passed over to the Court in the course of hearing of this petition as the copy was not found on the court file. A copy of the reply was however served on Mr. Rohitash Mishra, son of the petitioner, who argued the case today on behalf of the petitioner - -his father. It has been submitted by Mr. Meena that in term of the order dated 03.12.2013 passed by this Court the representation of the petitioner was placed before the Reward Committee constituted of an Additional Director General of Police (Crime) and two Inspector General of Police. The Committee considered the matter in its meeting held on 15.05.2014, but found no reason to recommend special promotion for the petitioner under Rule 28(a) of the Rules of 1989. Thereafter the Director General of Police, Rajasthan concurred with the report of the Committee and rejected the representation of the petitioner for special promotion. It is submitted that in the aforesaid facts, the direction issued by this Court under its order dated 03.12.2013 for reconsideration of the petitioner's case has been fully complied with and no contempt of the order of the court is made out. A copy of the minutes of the Reward Committee dated 15.05.2014 has been annexed to the reply to the contempt petition as Annexure -R/1. It has been submitted that the petitioner was informed of the decision not to promote him under Rule 28(a) of the Rules of 1989 vide letter dated 02.09.2014. Heard. Considered. Rule 28(a) of the Rules of 1989 reads as under : Rule 28(a): Nomination for promotion cadre course for next higher rank upto Sub -Inspector in Section 1 and Section III and upto Platoon Commander in Section II and Section IV of Rule -4 upto 10% of the vacancies to be filled in by promotion in a particular year, may be made by the Director General -cum -Inspector General of Police in case of those who have shown outstanding work in the anti -dacoity, anti -smuggling or in any special filed of Police work including performance in Games and Sports, or have put in not less than 20 years service exclusively as member of the service and also have exceptionally good and unblemished record of service with integrity: Provided that no member of the service shall be nominated more than once on account of 20 years service as mentioned above.
(3.) THE case of the petitioner has been considered under the said Rule by the Reward Committee. The Reward Committee has recorded as under : "The file was put up before the Committee in compliance of the Court order directing that the case of Head Constable Mool Chand Mishra be put up before the Committee to consider for out of turn promotion. The case was examined by the Committee. The matter originated with an application by the Head Constable Mool Chand Mishra to Parliamentary Secretary Shri Om Birla who sent it to the Home Department to consider the case for promotion. The application (sic applicant) stated that he had initially made an application to the State Minister for Tourism which had been sent to S.P. (Headquarter), Jaipur with a recommendation for rewarding the applicant. The reason for promotion, as claimed in the application, is the secret information be provided which led to improving the image of the State Police and the State Government. Nowhere the papers (sic make it) clear what the information was, what was the result of the information that embellished the image of the Government and the Police. No officer has corroborated the claim of the applicant. The applicant is a driver and normally not in the business of collecting information, however if he did go beyond the call of his normal duty and obtained some important information relevant to the Department or the State Government it should have moved up through the established Departmental channels, but there is no such evidence. In fact the case emanates from the Department of Tourism, Office of the State Minister and if there was some information useful to them that was provided by him they could have rewarded him. In fact, the way the application has been moved smacks of an attempt to circumvent the system and obtain a promotion. The Committee finds no reason to recommend promotion for Shri Mool Chand Mishra, Head Constable.";