Allahabad High Court
Amarjeet Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 6 February, 2023
Bench: Jaspreet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 597 of 2023
Petitioner :- Amarjeet Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Yadav,Shweta Singh Attre
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State-respondents.
By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks following reliefs:-
"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents authority, to open the Seal Cover Envelope and Promote the petitioner from the post of Constable to Head Constable/Computer Operator in pursuance of the Government Order No.13/12/89-Ka-1-1997, dated 28.05.1997, and Government Order No.1/2018-13(6)/2017/Ka-1-2018, dated 09.01.2018, and in the light of the judgment and order dated 09.05.2022 and 26.05.2022 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ-A No.480/2022 (Ramesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. & others), Writ-A No.8151 /2022 (Neeraj Kumar Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and others) from the date their Juniors have been granted promotion, with all consequential benefits.
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondents authority, to consider the claim of the petitioner for Ad hoc promotion on the post of Head Constable in pursuance of the Government Order No.13/12/89-Ka-1-1997, dated 28.05.1997, and Government Order No.1/2018-13(6)/2017/Ka-1-2-18, dated 09.01.2018, and in the light of the judgment and order dated 09.05.2022 and 26.05.2022 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ-A No.4801/2022 (Ramesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. & others), Writ-A No.8151/2022 ((Neeraj Kumar Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and others) from the date their Juniors have been granted promotion, with all consequential benefits."
Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was selected and appointed on the post of Constable in Uttar Pradesh Police in the year 2011. The petitioner has been discharging his duty diligently, sincerely and honestly and in this regard the authority concerned issued several appreciation letters and awards tot he petitioner. The respondents authority prepared the impugned seniority list of the candidates in which the name of the petitioner has been placed at Serial No.12684. The petitioner is senior most constable and the authority concerned is promoting the juniors to the petitioner and the respondents denied the promotion of the petitioner and reserved the seal cover envelop of the petitioner. However, the case of the petitioner for promotion has not been considered solely on the ground of pendency of the criminal case bearing Case Crime No.475 of 2016, under Section 419, 420 I.P.C, Police Station Belipur (now Geeda) District Gorakhpur.
It has further been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the final report filed before the court concerned and the court concerned by means of order dated 17.09.2022 directed for further investigation in the matter. Thereafter further investigation was done and submitted final report dated 17.11.2022 before the concerned court. The investigating officer has not found any evidence against the petitioner in the said case.
It is also submitted that the petitioner has not been considered merely on account of pendency of the Criminal Case and the petitioner cannot be held up indefinitely from being considered for promotion. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs. K.V. janki Raman, AIR 1991 SC 2010 wherein The Apex Court has issued guidelines in regard to seal cover envelop. This aspect has also been considered by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Kumari Maya (Mahalla Constable) vs. State of U.P. and others (2011) 5 ADJ 818. In view of the aforesaid decision as well as the Government Orders dated 28.05.1997 and 09.01.2018, which are applicable. This Court at this stage, does not think it proper to call for a counter affidavit or the instructions rather is of the opinion since the law is well settled in the light of two decisions and without entering into the merits or expressing any opinion on the claim of the petitioner, the Court disposes of the petition with a direction to the authorities to consider the case of the petitioner by opening seal cover envelop in light of the Government Orders and in light of the decision as noticed herein above as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date a copy of this order is placed before the authority concerned.
With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.2.2023
ank
