Allahabad High Court
A.S.I.M. Balveer Singh vs State Of U.P. And Others on 22 July, 2021
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8076 of 2021
Petitioner :- A.S.I.M. Balveer Singh
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Umar Khan
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Shri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel state functionaries.
This writ petition has been filed assailing the impugned order dated 07.2.2014 passed by respondent no.4/Senior Superintendent of Police, Aligarh awarding adverse/censure entry to petitioner and the appellate order dated 30.11.2014 passed by respondent no.6/Deputy Inspector General of Police, Range Aligarh.
At the very outset learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that the petitioner is working as Assistant Sub Inspector (Account) in Civil Police. He is entitled for promotion to the post of Sub Inspector (Account) as five years have passed since the date of adverse/censure order dated 07.2.2014, under Rule 4(b)(iv) of the Uttar Pradesh Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 wherein minor punishment so awarded to the employee can be considered for promotion after five years from the date of adverse/censure entry so awarded. He has placed reliance upon a decision passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in batch of writ petitions, leading of which is Writ-A No.7959 of 2019 (Bhupendra Singh vs. State of UP and 5 others), wherein this Court observed as under;
"12. The observations of this Court in the case of Head Constable Ram Babu (supra) appears to have been followed in the subsequent judgment of this Court in the case of Anil Kumar (supra). In the case of Anil Kumar (supra) also reference is made to circular dated 19.10.2015. This circular has been annexed alongwith counter affidavit filed in the present petition. The circular runs into 11 pages and refers to various pleas made before the Tribunal and also the orders passed by the Tribunal. Having referred to all such facts in the letter dated 19.10.2015 the ultimate prayer made is to grant permission to the department for filing writ petition before the Lucknow Bench. This order, therefore, cannot be treated to be laying down any principle or policy restricting relevance of adverse material only for a period of three years, for the purposes of considering a police personnel for promotion to the next higher post. The guiding principles which are laid down in the applicable circular remains in tune with the Government Order dated 30.6.1993, which is five years and not three years. Petitioners, therefore, would not be justified in seeking consideration of their claim for promotion relying upon the alleged circular dated 19.10.2015. It is otherwise not shown that a period of five years had expired since passing of order awarding censure entry to the petitioners on the date of consideration of their claim for promotion.
13. In view of what has been observed, no relief can be granted to the petitioners. However, this order would not preclude the petitioners' consideration for promotion in case no adverse material has come into existence upon expiry of five years since award of censure entry or imposing minor punishment."
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that he is not pressing the first prayer as five years have elapsed since the order dated 07.2.2014 was passed by respondent no.4 awarding adverse/censure entry and, as such, the only prayer is for the respondent authority to consider the case of petitioner for promotion, for which he is eligible in view of judgment of this Court in the case of Bhupendra Singh (supra).
On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel could not dispute the factum that this Court in the case of Bhupendra Singh (supra) has taken a view that candidates can claim promotion relying upon the Circular dated 30.6.1993 and as the period of five years have expired since passing of the order awarding censure entry to the petitioner.
In view of the above, with the consent of parties, this writ petition is being disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 18.09.2019 rendered in the case of Bhupendra Singh (supra). The respondents are directed to consider the case of promotion of petitioner in accordance with law as the order impugned has lost its efficacy, within a period of three months from the date of receipt a copy of this order.
Writ petition stands disposed of.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerised copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 22.7.2021
RKP
