Delhi High Court
Shivaji Chauhan vs Commissioner Of Police, Delhi And Ors. on 26 September, 2024
Author: C. Hari Shankar
Bench: C.Hari Shankar, Sudhir Kumar Jain
$~50
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 14821/2023
SHIVAJI CHAUHAN .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Mayank Sapra and Ms.
Lalima Das, Advs.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, DELHI
AND ORS. ....Respondents
Through: Ms. Radhika Bishwajit Dubey,
CGSC with Ms. Gurleen Kaur, Ms. Drishti
Rawal and Mr. Karan Khetani, Advs. Mr.
Gigi C George and Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advs.
for UOI, Mr. Narender Singh, SI, Delhi
Police/PHQ.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN
O R D E R (ORAL)
% 26.09.2024
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
1. The impugned order in this case, passed by the learned Central
Administrative Tribunal, reads thus:
"Present OA has been filed by the applicant seeking the following
reliefs:-
"1. Direct the respondents to consider and promote
the applicant to the post of ACP/Programmer with
effect from March 2000. Call for the records;
2. Direct the respondents to grant all consequential
benefits to the applicant.
3. Award costs of the proceedings.
4. Pass any such other and/or further orders, as
this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit."
2. At the outset, learned counsel for respondents submits that
they have already given the adhoc promotion to the applicant to the
post of Asst. Commissioner of Police and the request for
amendment in the Recruitment Rules for creating further
promotion are under formulation.
3. In view of the above, the applicant is directed to make a
fresh comprehensive representation to the respondents. Thereafter,
the respondents are directed to consider and dispose of the same by
passing a reasoned and speaking order within three weeks from the
date of receipt of such representation, relaxing the rules for the
time being.
4. The OA is disposed of in view of the aforesaid terms. No
costs."
2. After some hearing, Mr. Sapra, learned Counsel for the
petitioner submits that the main grievance of his clients is that, as the
Recruitment Rules1 for the post of ACP (Programmer) in the Delhi
Police have not been framed since 2002, despite various orders having
been passed by the learned Tribunal to that effect from time to time,
his client has not been able to obtain any meaningful consequential
benefits consequent on his promotion as ACP. In fact, his client has
not been able to get regular promotion as ACP which was, in fact, the
intent of the prayer in the OA.
3. He, therefore, prays that a direction may be issued to the
respondents to frame the RRs for the post of ACP (Programmer) as
expeditiously as possible.
1 "RRs" hereinafter
4. Mr Sapra has drawn our attention to an order dated 18 April
2011 passed by the learned Tribunal in OA 3547/2010 (Virender
Singh v GNCTD) in which the learned Tribunal directed the Ministry
of Home Affairs and the Government of National Capital Territory of
Delhi2 to notify the RRs for the post of ACP (Programmer) within
three months of receipt of a certified copy of that order. Since then, he
submits that thirteen years have been passed and the RRs for the post
of ACP (Programmer) are yet to be notified. He submits that the
direction for framing of the RRs for ACP (Programmer) was reiterated
by the learned Tribunal in its judgment dated 9 December 2019 in OA
2048/2014 (Kuldeep Singh Dhull v Comm. of Police).
5. Both these decisions are on record and, on perusal thereof, we
find that what Mr. Sapra says is correct.
6. It appears that, despite 13 years having been passed since the
judgment of the learned Tribunal in OA 3547/2010, the RRs for ACP
(Programmer) are yet to be finalised.
7. We, therefore, dispose of this writ petition, with consent of
learned Counsel for the petitioner, with a direction to the respondents
to finalise the RRs for the post of ACP (Programmer) as expeditiously
as possible and positively within six months from today. In the event
that any grievance survives thereafter, liberty shall stand reserved to
the petitioner to take appropriate steps as may be available in law.
2 GNCTD
8. The petition stands deposed of in the aforesaid terms.
C.HARI SHANKAR, J.
DR. SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN, J.
SEPTEMBER 26, 2024
ar
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
