Manipur High Court
Shri Moirangthem Ravikumar Singh vs The State Of Manipur Represented ... on 4 October, 2023
SHAMURAILATPAM Digitally signed by
SHAMURAILATPAM SUSHIL SHARMA
SUSHIL SHARMA Date: 2023.10.04 15:56:44 +05'30' P a g e | 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
Shri Moirangthem Ravikumar Singh, aged about 31 years,
S/O (L) Moirangthem Achouba Singh, resident of
Lalambung Makhong Takhellambam Leikai, P.O. Imphal,
P.S. Lamphel, District Imphal West, Manipur - 795001.
... PETITIONER
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Manipur represented by the Chief
Secretary (in-charge of Home), Government of
Manipur, Secretariat, South Block, Babupara, P.O. &
P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West, Manipur - 795001.
2. The Director General of Police, Manipur, Manipur
Police Headquarter, Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal,
District Imphal West, Manipur - 795001.
3. The Manipur Public Service Commission represented
by the Secretary, MPSC, Office at North AOC, P.O. &
P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West, Manipur - 795001.
4. Shri Lamabam Rajesh Khuman, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
Page |2
5. Shri Khuraijam Boney Singh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
6. Shri Moirangthem Kajao Meetei, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
7. Shri Nongmeikapam Imocha Singh, now serving as
Sub-Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department,
C/O DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
8. Shri S. Santosh Singh, now serving as Sub-Inspector
of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O DGP,
Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter, Babupara, P.O.
& P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West, Manipur - 795001.
9. Shri Chongtham Bimol Singh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
10. Shri Nongthombam David Singh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
Page |3
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
11. Shri Sanasam Suraj Singh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
12. Shri Moirangthem Romen Singh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
13. Shri Thokchom Bomcha Singh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
14. Shri Thokchom Brajakishor Singh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
15. Shri Ksh. Tomba Singh, now serving as Sub-Inspector
of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O DGP,
Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter, Babupara, P.O.
& P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West, Manipur - 795001.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
Page |4
16. Shri Phijam Sunil Singh, now serving as Sub-Inspector
of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O DGP,
Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter, Babupara, P.O.
& P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West, Manipur - 795001.
17. Shri Laiphrakpam James Suresh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
18. Shri Yengkokpam Kayelkumar Singh, now serving as
Sub-Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department,
C/O DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
19. Shri Hemam Haridas Singh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
20. Shri Mutum Peterson, now serving as Sub-Inspector of
Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O DGP,
Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter, Babupara, P.O.
& P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West, Manipur - 795001.
21. Shri Moirangthem Ranjit Singh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
Page |5
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
22. Md. Imdadullah Shah, now serving as Sub-Inspector of
Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O DGP,
Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter, Babupara, P.O.
& P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West, Manipur - 795001.
23. Shri Potshangbam Siddhartha Singh, now serving as
Sub-Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department,
C/O DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
24. Shri Kshetrimayum Dhiren Singh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
25. Shri Waikhom Surankumar Singh, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
26. Shri Thokchom Jotin Meitei, now serving as Sub-
Inspector of Police, Manipur Police Department, C/O
DGP, Manipur, Manipur Police Headquarter,
Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Imphal, District Imphal West,
Manipur - 795001.
... RESPONDENTS
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
Page |6
BEFORE
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M.V. MURALIDARAN
For the Petitioner :: Mr. N. Zequeson, Adv.
Mr. Th. Monish Anand, Adv.
For the Respondents :: Mr. RS Reisang, Sr. Adv. for the
MPSC
Mr. S. Biswajit, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Prista, Adv.
Mr. Sh. Shyam Sharma, GA.
.
Date of Hearing and
reserving Judgment & Order :: 30.08.2023
Date of Judgment & Order :: 04.10.2023
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
(CAV)
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for
issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the (i)
impugned proceedings of the DPC meeting held on 23.12.2021 for
promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police (Male/Civil) so far
as the DPC proceedings relates to promotion under the 15% out-
of-turn category; (ii) impugned order dated 24.12.2021 insofar as
appointments on promotion as Sub-Inspector of Police (Male/Civil)
in the Police Department, Manipur under the 15% out-of-turn
category are concerned and to direct the official respondents to
appoint the petitioner to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police
(Male/Civil) in the Manipur Police Department on promotion under
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
Page |7
the 15% out-of-turn category based on his medals and
achievements w.e.f. 24.12.2019 by convening a review DPC.
2. Brief facts are as follows:
The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Sub-
Inspector of Police (Male/Civil) on direct recruitment on 4.2.2015.
Since the appointment, the petitioner has been serving with great
dedication and devotion to his duty and to the entire satisfaction of
the higher officials without any adverse remarks till date. The
petitioner has been awarded DGP's Commendation Roll with Disc
on 19.10.2017 and also awarded a Good Service Mark vide order
dated 4.10.2018 issued by the DGP, Manipur. The petitioner is also
a meritorious sportsperson in the field of Taekwondo. While serving
as Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police (ASI), the petitioner was
selected to represent the State of Manipur in the 39th National
Taekwondo Championship, 2019. In the National Taekwondo
Championship in the Individual Senior Male Poomsae Event, the
petitioner won gold medal representing the State of Manipur. In
view of the achievements, the petitioner had a legitimate
expectation for getting promotion to the next higher post under the
Recruitment Rules of Sub-Inspector of Police (SI of Police).
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
Page |8
2.1. The Director General of Police, Manipur had issued
Standing Order No.189 dated 15.4.2021 to the effect that the
achievements in sports shall be applicable only to those
sports/game disciplines/events which are recognized by the All
India Police Sports Control Board (AIPSCB) and that too at the
International or National/Zonal Level.
2.2. The All India Police Games Rules came into force with
effect from 1.12.2012 and Rule 5 therein provides the events
included in the All India Police Games and the event of Taekwondo
is included in the All India Judo Cluster under Rule 5(a)(v)(4). In
other words, Taekwondo is a sports/discipline recognized by the
AIPSSCB. In view of his achievements, the petitioner is eligible to
be considered for promotion to the post of SI of Police under the
15% out-of-turn category in terms of the Recruitment Rules.
2.3. While so, vide impugned order dated 24.12.2021, as
many as 134 ASI's have been appointed on promotion to the post
of SI of Police in order of merit with immediate effect on the
recommendation of a Class-II DPC meeting held on 23.12.2021,
which includes 23 appointments on promotions under the 15% out-
of-turn category. On perusal of the order dated 24.12.2021, the
petitioner has reason to believe that several illegalities and
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
Page |9
irregularities have been committed by the DPC in its meeting held
on 23.12.2021 for consideration for promotion of ASI to SI of Police
as several officers among the 23 appointees are not recipients of
either category of medals.
2.4. The officers appointed at Serial Nos.119, 121, 122,
123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133 and 134 are not
the recipients of any gallantry medal or sports medal. The officers
who are only recipients of Good Service Marks cannot be
recommended by the DGP for promotion under the 15% out-of-turn
category and their consideration and recommendation by the DPC
for appointment on promotion as SI of Police is illegal, arbitrary and
against the provisions of the relevant Recruitment Rules.
2.5. The achievements of other appointees mentioned at
Serial Nos.112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 120, 127 and 130
under the 15% out-of-turn category are highly suspicious and
doubtful as there are illegalities committed in the impugned DPC
proceedings. When the petitioner has filed RTI application seeking
certain information relevant to the DPC proceedings, the same has
been rejected by the Police Department.
2.6. The impugned proceedings of the DPC meeting held
on 23.12.2021 and the impugned order dated 24.12.2021 are in
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 10
violation of the order dated 22.12.2021 passed in WP(C) No.926 of
2021. The ineligible persons have been considered for promotion
under the 15% out-of-turn category, while the petitioner who is
eligible for promotion has been illegally left out and deprived of his
rightful opportunity for promotion to the post of SI of Police. Such
arbitrary act of the respondent authorities is violative of the
fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 14 and
16 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the writ petition.
3. The respondents 1 and 2 filed affidavit-in-opposition
stating that Schedule-A of Recruitment Rule of SI of Police has
been superseded by the notification dated 17.12.2009. The DGP
in order to streamline the system of out-of-turn promotion in respect
of police personnel in the Manipur Police Department for promotion
to Inspector of Police (Male/Female-Civil), Subedar, Sub-Inspector
of Police (Male/Female), Jemadar Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police
(Male/Female-Civil), Havildar, Head Constable (Male-Civil) and
Head Constable (Female-Civil) issued Standing Order No.189
dated 15.4.2021 with the approval of the Home Department. In the
Standing Order No.189, Good Service Marks are taken into account
for awarding 1 mark per Good Service Mark (GSM) with maximum
limit of 25 Good Service Marks.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 11
3.1. It is stated that Taekwondo fighting is recognized by
AIPSCB, however, its sub-event Poomsae is not recognized by
AIPSCB. In respect of the petitioner, only one GSM is taken into
account for consideration under the 15% out-of-turn promotion in
the DPC. The gold medal in the sub-event Poomsae was not
considered in the DPC as the Screening Committee had excluded
the medal due to non-recognition by the AIPSCB. Hence, prayed
for dismissal of the writ petition.
4. The third respondent/MPSC filed affidavit-in-
opposition stating that no certificate or relevant documents have
been produced to show that the petitioner had won gold medal
representing the State of Manipur in the National Taekwondo
Championship before the DPC in its meeting held on 23.12.2021 in
connection with the appointment by promotion from ASI to SI of
Police. In the Standing Order issued by the DGP, the methodology
of awarding marks applicable to all out-of-turn promotions is
provided at Para C(1) wherein GSM is mentioned as awarded by
the DGP and carried 1 mark per GSM with a maximum limit of 25
GSMs.
4.1 It is stated that when the Deputy Secretary (Home)
wrote a proposal letter dated 15.12.2021 to the MPSC for promotion
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 12
from ASI to SI of Police (Male/Civil), the name of the petitioner was
appeared in the recommended list of ASI in order of seniority for
consideration under the 15% category by the DPC at Serial No.91
of the seniority list. Pursuant to the proposal, the MPSC held DPC
on 23.12.2021 for the total vacancies of 154 out of which 23 were
under 15% out-of-turn quota promotion. The Committee after
examining the achievements furnished by the Administrative
Department along with the Integrity Certificates recommended 23
ASI for promotion to SI of Police wherein the name of the petitioner
was not included, as the petitioner had achieved only 1 GSM and
scored 1 point. The last recommended ASI under out-of-turn
promotion in the above said DPC, namely respondent No.26 had
achieved 3 GSM and scored 3 points which is much higher than the
petitioner and more meritorious in terms of the achievements for the
out-of-turn promotion. Therefore, there is no illegality or irregularity
in the DPC proceedings. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the writ
petition.
5. The private respondents filed affidavit-in-opposition
stating that on the recommendation of the DPC meeting held on
23.12.2021 in association with the MPSC, the Deputy Secretary
(Home), issued an order dated 24.12.2021 in the name of Governor
thereby appointing the private respondents as SI of Police
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 13
(Male/Civil) under the 15% out-of-turn promotion quota. However,
the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for quashing the
order dated 24.12.2021 insofar as it relates to the appointment on
promotion to the post of SI of Police in the Police Department under
the 15% out-of-turn promotion quota.
5.1. It is stated that the private respondents were eligible
for consideration for promotion to the post of SI of Police under the
15% out-of-turn promotion quota and the DPC had considered all
the relevant documents including the ACRs of all the promotes
including the private respondents in the meeting held on 23.12.201.
The DPC while recommending the names of the private
respondents had perused all the documents including the ACRs
which were placed before them.
5.2. It is further stated that the petitioner had never
participated any tournament in the discipline of Taekwondo
conducted by the AIPSCB. Further, the petitioner has not produced
any document to show that he is an outstanding
player/sportsperson recognised by AIPSCB. The event Poomsae
is not yet organized in any All India Police Meet/Championship by
the Board. As such, any medal in that event cannot be considered
for the purpose of promotion. Since the petitioner is not qualified
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 14
for promotion to the post of SI of Police, he has no locus to file the
writ petition challenging the promotion of the private respondents.
Hence, prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.
6. Assailing the impugned proceedings of the DPC
meeting held on 23.12.2021 for promotion to the post of SI of Police
(Male/Civil) relating to promotion under the 15% out-of-turn
category and the appointment orders dated 24.12.2021 thereby
appointing the private respondents as SI of Police on promotion
under the 15% out-of-turn category, Mr. N. Zequeson, the learned
counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been
serving as ASI from 4.2.2015 i.e. for more than eight years on
regular basis. He won a gold medal representing the State of
Manipur in National Taekwondo Championship, which is a sports
discipline recognized by the AIPSCB and his participation therein
had also been approved by the DGP, Manipur. In view of the
achievements, the petitioner is eligible to be considered for
promotion to the post of SI of Police in the Manipur Police
Department under the 15% out-of-turn category in terms of the
Recruitment Rules.
7. Mr. N. Zequeson, the learned counsel for the petitioner
further submitted that, vide impugned order dated 24.12.2021, as
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 15
many as 134 ASIs have been appointed on promotion to the post
of SI of Police in order of merit with immediate effect on the
recommendation of DPC meeting held on 23.12.2021, which
includes 23 appointments on promotion under the 15% out-of-turn
category. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, there
are illegalities and irregularities committed by the DPC in its meeting
held on 23.12.2021 for consideration of promotion to the post of SI
of Police (Male/Civil) as several officers among the 23 appointees
are not the recipients of either category of medals.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioner further
submitted that respondents 11, 13 to 21 and 23 to 26 are not the
recipients of any gallantry medal or sports medal, however, they
have been considered for appointment on promotion under the 15%
out-of-turn category.
9. Drawing this Court's attention to Rule 43(1) and (2) of
Part-III of the Assam Police Manual, the learned counsel for the
petitioner submitted that for recommendation by the DGP for
appointment by promotion under the 15 out-of-turn category to the
post of SI of Police, there is no room for taking into consideration
the GSM awarded to the officers as the same has not been
expressly provided in the Recruitment Rules. Thus, the
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 16
respondents 11, 13 to 21 and 23 to 26 who are only the recipients
of GSM and they cannot be recommended by the DGP for
promotion under the 15% out-of-turn category in terms of the
relevant Recruitment Rules and their consideration and
recommendation by the DPC for appointment on promotion to the
post of SI of Police is illegal, arbitrary and against the provisions of
the Recruitment Rules.
10. It is also the submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the achievements of the other appointees found at
Serial Nos.112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 120, 127 and 130 in
the impugned DPC proceedings under the 15% out-of-turn category
is highly suspicious and the said persons cannot be considered for
appointment on promotion under the 15% out-of-turn category.
Since the ineligible persons have been considered for promotion
under the 15% out-of-turn category, while the petitioner who is
eligible for promotion is left out, the impugned proceedings of the
DPC meeting held on 23.12.2021 and the consequential
appointment order dated 24.12.2021 are liable to be set aside and
the petitioner should be considered for promotion to the post of SI
of Police under the 15% out-of-turn category for the achievements
done by him.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 17
11. Per contra, Mr. Sh. Shyam Sharma, the learned
Government Advocate appearing for the respondent State
submitted that though Taekwondo fighting is recognised by the
AIPSCB, its sub-event Poomsae is not recognised by the AIPSCB.
He would submit that as stipulated in the Standing Order No.189
dated 15.4.2021, GSMs are taken into account for awarding 1 mark
per GSM with maximum limit of 25 GSMs. In respect of the
petitioner, only 1 GSM is taken into account for consideration under
the 15% out-of-turn promotion in the DPC. The gold medal in the
sub-event Poomsae was not considered in the DPC as the
Screening Committee has excluded the said medal due to non-
recognition by the AIPSCB. The illegalities and irregularities in the
proceedings of DPC pleaded by the petitioner are concocted. Only
taking into consideration the achievements of the candidates,
namely the private respondents, the impugned appointment orders
in respect of the 15% out-of-turn category have been issued. Thus,
a prayer has been made to dismiss the writ petition.
12. Mr. RS Reisang, the learned senior counsel for the
Manipur Public Service Commission (MPSC) submitted that the
petitioner has achieved only 1 GSM and scored 1 point, whereas
the last recommended ASI under out-of-turn category promotion in
the above said DPC had achieved 3 GSMs and scored 3 points,
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 18
which is much higher than the petitioner and more meritorious in
terms of the achievements for the out-of-turn promotion. The
learned senior counsel would submit that though the name of the
petitioner was provided in the recommended list of ASI as issued
by the DGP for promotion to the post of SI of Police in order of
seniority for consideration under the 15% out-of-turn category by
the DPC, since the petitioner has not fulfilled the criteria, the DPC
has not considered his name. There were no lapses or irregularities
in the above said DPC proceedings, as the DPC had recommended
only the eligible and more meritorious incumbents for promotion
under the 15% out-of-turn quota, which is purely merit based
irrespective of seniority as per the relevant Recruitment Rules.
13. The learned senior counsel for the MPSC added that
GSMs are awarded by the DGP. Moreover, in the Recruitment
Rules, it is provided that 15% of the promotion quota shall be filled
from ASIs having satisfactorily completed the probation and who
have been recommended by the DGP for promotion by reason of
their conspicuous acts of gallantry in discharge of official duties or
who are outstanding sportsman recognized by the AIPSCB with two
years regular service in the grade. The GSM awarded by the DGP
considered as awards vide the Standing Order No.189, dated
15.4.2021.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 19
14. Supporting the decision taken in the impugned DPC
proceedings and the appointment orders, Mr. S. Biswajit, the
learned senior counsels for the private respondents submit that on
the recommendation made by the DPC in its meeting held on
23.12.2021, the impugned order dated 24.12.2021 has been issued
thereby appointing the private respondents as SI of Police under
the 15% out-of-turn category. The private respondents were
eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of SI of Police
under the 15% out-of-turn category and the DPC had considered
the relevant documents and ACRs of all the promotees, including
the private respondents in the meeting held on 23.12.2021. Only
upon perusing the achievements done by the private respondents
and the other related documents, the DPC had recommended the
names of the private respondents for appointment on promotion to
the post of SI of Police under the 15% out-of-turn category.
15. The learned senior counsels for the private
respondents further submit that the petitioner never participate any
tournament in the discipline of Taekwondo conducted by the
AIPSCB. Further, the petitioner has not produced any document to
show that he is an outstanding player recognised by the AIPSCB.
Though the Taekwondo is recognised by the AIPSCB, its sub-event
Pomsae is not yet organised in any All India Police Meet by the
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 20
Board. As such, any medal in that event cannot be considered for
the purpose of promotion, which the DPC has rightly not considered
the same. Furthermore, the said tournament in which the petitioner
is claiming to have participated is not a National Police
Championship. Since the petitioner is not qualified for the
promotion to the post of SI of Police, he has no locus to file the writ
petition questioning the recommendation and the appointment of
the private respondents on promotion under the 15% out-of-turn
category. Thus, a prayer has been made to dismiss the writ petition.
16. This Court considered the rival submissions and also
perused the materials available on record.
17. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is eligible to
be considered for promotion to the post of SI of Police in the
Manipur Police Department under the 15% out-of-turn category in
terms of the Recruitment Rules, as he won a gold medal
representing the State of Manipur in National Taekwondo
Championship in the Individual Senior Male Poomsae Event which
is a sports discipline recognized by the AIPSCB and his
participation therein had also been approved by the DGP, Manipur.
However, ignoring the same while giving promotion to 134 ASIs
which is inclusive of 23 appointments on promotion under the 15%
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 21
out-of-turn category, the name of the petitioner has been left out.
According to the petitioner, such an act of the respondent
authorities in not considering the name of the petitioner is arbitrary.
Therefore, the impugned proceedings of the DPC in not considering
the appointment of the petitioner for promotion under the 15% out-
of-turn category and the consequential appointment orders are
liable to be quashed and the petitioner has to be promoted to the
post of SI of Police under the 15% out-of-turn category.
18. On the other hand, it is the plea of the official
respondents that Taekwondo fighting though recognized by
AIPSCB, its sub-event Poomsae is not recognized by AIPSCB. As
far as the case of the petitioner is concerned, only one GSM is taken
into account for consideration under the 15% out-of-turn promotion
in the DPC. The gold medal in the sub-event Poomsae was not
considered in the DPC as the Screening Committee had excluded
the said medal due to non-recognition by the AIPSCB.
19. Rule 5 of the Rules of the All India Police Sports
Control Board provides the Events. Under Rule 5(a)(v)(4), the
event of Taekwondo Championship is included in the All India
Police Judo Cluster.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 22
20. The official respondents admitted that Taekwondo
fighting is recognized by AIPSCB, however, they have disputed that
its sub-event Poomsae is not recognized by AIPSCB. In this regard,
the learned Government Advocate has drawn this Court's attention
to the letter dated 13.1.2022 of the Addl. DGP (Trg.), Manipur,
wherein it has been stated as under:
"With reference to your letter no. E/30/16/2021-
PHQ (ADM)(ASI-SI)/503 dated 12th January
2022 regarding intimation whether Taekwondo
sub-event "Poomsae" is recognised by All India
Police Sports Control Board (AIPSCB) or not. The
said event comes under the discipline of
Taekwondo, whereas Taekwondo is recognised by
AIPSCB, but the event Poomsae is not yet
organised in any all India Police
Meet/Championship by the board. Besides, a letter
has also been sent to the Secretary, AIPSCB New
Delhi regarding the above for clarification and the
reply is still waited."
21. There is difference in the meaning of the words
"organised" and "recognised". The Oxford dictionary defines
"organize" as 'to make arrange for' or 'initiate, arrange for'. Thus,
to organize means to make arrangement. On the other hand, the
word "recognize" is defined as 'to realise or admit' or 'acknowledge
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 23
existence, validity, character or claims of' or 'show appreciation of,
reward'. Thus, to recognize means to acknowledge the existence
or validity of a thing or appreciate or reward.
22. It is undisputed that the sub-event Poomsae is not
organized by the AIPSCB in All India Police Games. However, this
does not mean that the said event Poomsae is not recognized by
AIPSCB.
23. As could be seen from the order dated 27.5.2019 of
the Taekwondo Federation of Manipur, it is clear that the petitioner
and others were selected to represent the State of Manipur in the
39th National Taekwondo Championship at K.D. Singh Babu
National Stadium, Lucknow from 14.6.2019 to 16.06.2019. In order
dated 27.5.2019, the names of the players of Taekwondo male and
female have been given. The message dated 7.6.2019 of the
Assistant Sports Officer, Manipur Police Sports Club to the CO-1st
MR also clearly states that the petitioner and two others namely Th.
Praveen Singh and M. Romiyo Singh will be participating as players
in the 39th National Taekwondo Championship organised by
Taekwondo Federation of India at Lucknow from 14.6.2019 to
16.6.2019.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 24
24. If really the event Poomsae is not recognised by the
AIPSCB, how the authorities have permitted the petitioner and
others to participate in the 39th National Taekwondo Championship.
The order of Taekwondo Federation of Manipur and the message
of the Assistant Sports Officer of Manipur Police Sports Club supra
clearly indicate that the petitioner has played Individual - Senior
Male - Male - Poomsae representing the State of Manipur.
25. Poomsae is also a very competitive aspect of
Taekwondo and has a vibrant domestic and international circuit of
competitions catering for novices through to elite athletes
competing at world championship level. Taekwondo is variously
translated as "the way of hand and foot" or "the way of kicking and
striking".
26. The clarification furnished in the letter dated 13.1.2022
is to the effect that the event Poomsae is not yet organized in any
All India Police Meet by the AIPSCB. No clarification has been
given to the effect that Poomsae is not recognized by AIPSCB.
Mere reference of the letter of the Addl. DGP (Trg.) Manipur referred
to supra, cannot be a ground to hold that the event Poomsae has
not been recognized by AIPSCB.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 25
27. Rule 5 of the All India Police Games Rules clearly
states that the Taekwondo Championship shall be organised. The
Rules further provide that Taekwondo competition will be conducted
as per the latest Rules prescribed by the Taekwondo Federation of
India.
28. There cannot be any dispute qua winning of gold
medal by the petitioner representing the State of Manipur in the
National Taekwondo Championship in the Individual Senior Male
Poomsae Event. The petitioner and other players who had
participated in the 39th National Taekwonda Championship are
called as "Taekwondo Players (Men) of the Manipur Police Sports
Club", which means that whatever the sub-event of Taekwondo
Championship (Men and Women) is coming under the Taekwondo
Championship and Poomsae is the event of Taekwondo.
29. The petitioner also produced achievement report in
respect of SSB Taekwondo team. On a perusal of the same, it is
seen that various Taekwondoa Championships were held, including
7th Senior National Poomsae Championship 2014 at Jaipur
(Rajasthan) from 2.9.2014 to 5.9.2014 and the 8th National Senior
Poomsae Championship 2015 at Visakhapatnam (AP) from
25.10.2015 to 27.10.2015.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 26
30. It is to be pointed out that if the event Poomsae is not
recognized and/or approved, Poomsae Championship would not
have been conducted by the 7th Senior National Poomsae
Championship 2014 and the 8th National Senior Poomsae
Championship 2015. Only because the said event is approved and
recognized by the appropriate authority, the Poomsae National
Championships were organised. Therefore, the presumption is that
the event Poomsae is recognized as the said event is coming under
Taekwondo. Therefore, this Court is of the view that when the
discipline of Taekwondo is recognized by the AIPSCB, the event of
Taekwondo namely Poomsae is also considered to have been
recognized by the AIPSCB and it cannot be said that event
Poomsae is not recognised. In fact, the respondent authorities
have admitted that the event Poomsae comes under the discipline
of Taekwondo.
31. As rightly argued by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, the petitioner had a legitimate expectation for getting
promotion to the next higher post as he won gold medal
representing the State of Manipur. It is no doubt true that the
petitioner is an outstanding sportsman.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 27
32. The Outstanding sportsmen recognized by the All
India Police Sports Control Board appearing in the relevant
Recruitment Rules does not mean participation only in tournaments
conducted by the All India Police Sports Control Board. On a
perusal of the Standing Order No.189 dated 15.4.2021, it is clear
that medals obtained representing the country in international level
or representing the State in National/Zonal level in sports/game
disciplines/events recognized by the All India Police Sports Control
Board are eligible for consideration for promotion under the out-of-
turn category.
33. For promotion to the post of SI of Police, the
Recruitment Rules stipulates - 50% of the posts are to be filled up
by promotion and 50% by direct recruitment. The criteria for
promotion is as follows:
"(1) 85% of the promotion quota shall be filled up
from ASIs (Civil) having passed the pre-promotion
selection test prescribed by the state Government
after having satisfactorily completed the probation
with 5 (five) years regular service in the grade.
(2) 15% of the promotion quota shall be filled from
ASIs (Civil) having satisfactorily completed the
probation, 3 (three) years regular service in the
grade, having passed pre-promotion selected test
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 28
prescribed by the State Government and who have
been recommended by the DGP for promotion by
reason of their conspicuous acts of gallantry in
discharge of official duties or who are outstanding
sportspersons recognized by the All India Police
Sports Control Board, Provided that -
(i) Officers recommended beyond the normal
zone of consideration under category (2) above
shall be placed below officers recommended
under normal zone of consideration in the merit
list.
(ii) If the promotion quota under Category (2)
above cannot be filled up due to various reasons,
the same may be filled up from the category (1)
above during a particular recruitment year."
34. Para C of the Standing Order No.189 dated 15.4.2021
speaks about the methodology of awarding of marks. Para C is
quoted hereunder for ready reference:
"C Methodology of Awarding of Marks
1. The following method for awarding of marks
shall be applied in all the Out-of-Turn promotions
mentioned above in Rule (A).
a. President's Police Medal for Gallantry - 30
marks
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 29
b. Police Medal for Gallantry - 25 marks
c. Chief Minister's Police Medal for Gallantry -
15 marks
d. Good Service Mark (GSM) awarded by the
Director General of Police, Manipur - 1 mark per
GSM with a maximum limit of 25 GSMs (i.e. 25
marks)
2. The following method for awarding of marks
(with maximum limit of 25 marks) shall be applied
in all Out-of-Turn promotions mentioned above in
Rule (A) except for promotion to the ranks of
Inspector of Police (Rule(A)(1) and Subedar
(Rule(A)(2)).
a. Representing Country in International Level
(i) Gold Medalists/Winner - 15 Marks
(ii) Silver Medalists/Runner-up - 10 Marks
(iii) Bronze Medalist - 5 Marks
b. Representing State in National/Zonal Level
(iv) Gold Medalists/Winner - 3 Marks
(v) Silver Medalists/Runner-up - 2 Marks
(vi) Bronze Medalist - 1 Mark
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 30
The above methodology for awarding of marks
shall be applicable to only those sports/game
disciplines/events recognized by the All India
Police Sports Control Board (AIPSCB).
N.B. Candidate(s) shall be recommended for Out-
of-Turn promotion based on the consolidated/total
marks achieved as per the above methodology.
"In case two or more officers get the same total
marks then the inter se seniority will be
determined by the age i.e. oldest officer to the
youngest"."
35. The All India Police Sports Control Board Rules came
into force from 1.12.2012. Rule 5 provides for events included in
the All India Police Games. For proper appreciation, Rule 5 is
quoted hereunder:
"5. Events
(a) The games shall comprise the following
tournaments:
(i) All India Police Hockey Championship (Men
only)
(ii) Shri B.N.Mullik Memorial All India Police
Football Championship (Men only)
(iii) All India Police Volleyball Cluster consisting:
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 31
1. Volleyball Championship (Men & Women)
2. Basketball Championship (Men & Women)
3. Handball Championship (Men & Women)
4. Yoga Championship (Men & Women)
(iv) All India Police Wrestling Cluster consisting:
1. Weightlifting Championship (Men & Women)
2. Boxing Championship (Men & Women)
3. Wrestling Championship (Men & Women)
4. Kabaddi Championship (Men & Women)
5. Body Building Championship (Men only)
(v) All India Police Judo Cluster consisting:
1. Judo Championship (Men & Women)
2. Gymnastics Championship (Men only)
3. Wushu Championship (Men & Women)
4. Taekwondo Championship (Men & Women)
(vi) All India Police Aquatic Meet & Cross Country
Race Championship (Men only)
(vii) All India Police Athletics (Men and Women)
Championship
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 32
(viii) All India Police Shooting (Sports)
Championship (Men & Women)
(ix) All India Police Water Sports Championship
(Men only)
(x) All India Police Equestrian Championship &
Mounted Police Duty Meet (Men only)
(xi) All India Police Lawn Tennis Championship
(for Gazetted Officers only)
(xii) All India Police Golf Championship (for
Gazetted Officers only)
(xiii) All India Police Badminton Championship (for
both Gazetted & Non Gazetted Officers - Men &
Women)
xiv) All India Police Archery (Men & Women)
Championship"
36. Under Rule 5(a)(v)(4), the Taekwondo is included in
the All India Police Judo Cluster. As stated supra, Taekwondo is a
sports/discipline recognized by the AIPSCB. Since the event
Poomsae is coming under the Taekwondo, it is also a
sports/discipline recognized and organised by the Taekwondo
Federation of India.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 33
37. The plea of the petitioner is strengthened by the
Certificate issued to the petitioner awarding gold medal for
participation in the event "Individual - Senior Male - Male -
Poomsae" in the 39th National Taekwondo Championship for
Senior, Junior, Sub-Junior Pee-Wee Male/Female & Black Belt
Senior 25th National Poomsae Taekwondo Championship. The
said certificate would clearly prove that the event Poomsae has
been conducted by the Taekwondo Federation of India and the
petitioner had participated in the said Event representing the State
of Manipur and won gold medal.
38. At this juncture, it is pertinent to note that Rule 35
provides that any sporting event recognised by the Indian Olympic
Association/concerned National Sports Federation to which
AIPSCB is affiliated to can be included in the All India Police
Games. As stated supra, it is also undisputed that the event
Poomsae is recognized by the Taekwondo Federation of India
which is the National Sports Federation. Therefore, it can safely be
concluded that Poomsae event is recognised by AIPSCB.
39. Out-of-turn promotions are the promotions which are
given to any employee before the other employees who had right of
promotion prior to the said employee. Such type of promotions are
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 34
given due to some exceptionally good work done by employee
during his service
40. The respondent authorities, citing that Poomsae is not
organised by All India Police Meet, have not considered the
petitioner under the 15% out-of-turn category. When the
participation in the National Taekwondo Championship by the
petitioner has been approved by the DGP and based on the
approval when the petitioner had participated and won gold medal,
it is unfair on the part of the respondent authorities in not
considering the gold medal won by the petitioner for the purpose of
giving promotion under the 15% out-of-turn category. The factual
scenario proves that the petitioner should be considered for
promotion under the 15% out-of-turn category. The non-
consideration of winning of gold medal by the petitioner in the event
Poomsae representing the State of Manipur in National Taekwondo
Championship is unacceptable.
41. The case of the petitioner is that in terms of the
Recruitment Rules, under the 15% out-of-turn category, the DPC
has to consider only those persons who have been recommended
by the DGP by reason of their conspicuous acts of gallantry in
discharge of official duties or who are outstanding sportsmen
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 35
recognised by the AIPSCB. According to the petitioner, as many as
134 ASIs (Male/Civil) have been appointed on promotion to the post
of SI of Police (Male/Civil) on the recommendation of the DPC
meeting held on 23.12.2021, which includes 23 appointments on
promotions under the 15% out-of-turn category.
42. The further case of the petitioner is that in the
impugned order dated 24.12.2021 the 15% out-of-turn category
have been listed from Sl. No.112 to 134. According to the petitioner,
several officers among the 23 appointees are not recipients of either
category of medals and are not recipients of any gallantry medal or
sports medal. Similarly, the GSMs awarded to the officers have not
been expressly provided in the relevant Recruitment Rules. The
private respondents who are only recipients of GSMs cannot be
recommended by the DGP for promotion under the 15% out-of-turn
category and their consideration and recommendation by the DPC
for appointment on promotion as SI of Police is illegal, arbitrary and
against the provisions of the Recruitment Rules. According to
learned counsel for the petitioner, ineligible persons have been
considered for promotion under the 15% out-of-turn category
leaving the petitioner, who is eligible for promotion under the 15%
out-of-turn category.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 36
43. Countering the plea of the petitioner, Mr. RS Reisang,
the learned senior counsel for the MPSC submitted that in the
proposal letter sent by the Deputy Secretary (Home) to the MPSC
for promotion from ASI to SI of Police, the name of the petitioner
was placed at Serial No.91. Pursuant to the proposal, DPC meeting
was held on 23.12.2021 for a total vacancy of 154, out of which 23
were under the 15% out-of-turn category promotion. The
Committee after careful examination of the achievements furnished
by the Administrative Department recommended 23 ASIs for
promotion to SI of Police wherein the name of the petitioner was not
included, as he had achieved only 1 GSM. According to the learned
senior counsel, the last recommended ASI under out-of-turn
category in the said DPC had achieved 3 GSM and scored 3 points
which is much higher than the petitioner. Therefore, there were no
lapses or irregularities in the impugned DPC proceedings.
44. As far as awarding of points to the petitioner is
concerned, this Court had taken into consideration the gold medal
won by the petitioner for the event Poomsae. As per Standing
Order No.184 dated 15.4.2021, if we take 3 marks and adding 1
GSM, totally the petitioner scored 4 points, which is much higher
than the last recommended candidate.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 37
45. Though the petitioner contended that the private
respondents are ineligible persons for consideration under the 15%
out-of-turn category, nothing has been produced to establish the
same. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the private
respondents submitted that the private respondents have been
considered for promotion under the 15% out-of-turn category, as
they are entitled for the same. There is nothing suspicious and
doubtful regarding the promotion given to the private respondents.
Prima facie, the respondent State and the MPSC have established
that their action in giving promotion to the private respondents
under out-of-turn category is based on the merits.
46. Mr. Sh. Shyam Sharma, the learned Government
Advocate for the respondent State submitted that the private
respondents have been promoted to the post of SI of Police and are
performing their respective duties and functions without any
complaint from any quarter and to the satisfaction of their respective
superiors as on today shouldering the responsibility of member of
law enforcement agency of the State.
47. It appears that the private respondents are recipients
of medals for gallantry and based on their achievements only, they
were considered for giving promotion to the post of SI of Police
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 38
under the 15% out-of-turn category. The petitioner has not
questioned the proceedings of the DPC on the ground that the DPC
has not followed the Office Memorandum dated 15.5.2014 issued
by the Department of P&AR (Personnel Division) while
recommending the names of the private respondents for giving
promotion to the post of SI of Police under the 15% out-of-turn
category.
48. In the absence of any proof produced by the petitioner
to show that the private respondents are ineligible for promotion to
the post of SI of Police under the 15% out-of-turn category, the
petitioner, as a matter of right, cannot seek setting aside the
impugned DPC proceedings dated 23.12.2021 in respect of the
private respondents. On the other hand, the non-consideration of
the petitioner by the same DPC for promotion under the 15% out-
of-turn category for his gold medal won in the National Taekwondo
Championship representing the State of Manipur is not acceptable
and/or appreciable in view of the finding arrived at by this Court in
the earlier paragraphs that the petitioner is eligible to be considered
for promotion under the 15% out-of-turn category for his
achievement in the National Taekwondo Championship.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 39
49. In the light of the above, the respondent authorities
ought to have considered the achievements made by the petitioner
and the gold medal won. As stated supra, the gold medal won by
the petitioner representing the State of Manipur in National
Taewkwondo Championship is a sports discipline recognised by the
Taekwondo Federation of India. Rules 28 and 29 contain the
provisions for awarding the police personnel who won medals in
National Championships, Olympics, Asian Games, Commonwealth
Games, etc. The undisputed fact remains that Poomsae is sub-
event of Taekwondo.
50. This Court is of the considered view that since
Poomsae is sub-event of Taekwondo which is recognized by
AIPSCB, the Selection Committee ought not to have come to the
conclusion that the Poomsae is not recognized by AIPSCB without
any basis and citing the same, the gold medal achieved by the
petitioner was wrongly and illegally rejected by the Committee and
resultantly not considered by the DPC. Considering the given facts
and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is entitled to be
promoted as a meritorious sportsperson by giving due
consideration of his gold medal won by him.
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 40
51. Pending writ petition, the petitioner has moved an
application, being MC (WP) No.95 of 2023, to reserve one post of
SI of Police. After hearing both sides, this Court, on 28.3.2023,
passed the following order:
"[1] Heard Mr. N. Zequeson, learned counsel for
the applicant; Mr. RS Reisang, learned senior
counsel; Mr. S. Biswajit, learned senior counsel;
Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned counsel for the
respondents and Mr. H. Samarjit, learned GA for
the respondents.
[2] The present Misc. case in MC(WP(C)) No. 95 of
2023 has been filed seeking to reserve one post of
Sub-Inspector of Police (Male/Civil) in the Police
Department, Manipur till disposal of the connected
writ petition WP(C) No. 991 of 2021.
[3] Learned counsels appearing for the
respondents also made no objection in allowing the
Misc. case.
[4] Therefore, the MC(WP(C)) No. 95 of 2023 is
allowed by directing the official respondents to
keep one post of Sub-Inspector of Police
(Male/Civil) felt vacant in the Police Department,
Manipur till disposal of the connected writ petition
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021."
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 41
52. Thus, pursuant to the order dated 28.3.2023, one post
of SI of Police is reserved. As such, in the interest of justice, the
petitioner can be accommodated in the said post even without
disturbing the promotions already given to the private respondents.
If such accommodation is made, no prejudice would be caused to
either of the respondents. The petitioner can be given promotion
notionally with effect from the date of promotion of the private
respondents.
53. In the result,
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned proceedings of the DPC
meeting held on 23.12.2021 for promotion to
the post of SI of Police (Male/Civil) relating
to the promotion under the 15% out-of-turn
category insofar as not considering the
petitioner is set aside.
(iii) The respondent authorities are directed to
take steps to appoint the petitioner to the
post of SI of Police (Male/Civil) in the
Manipur Police Department on promotion
notionally under 15% out-of-turn category
based on his medals and achievements with
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
P a g e | 42
effect from the date of promotion of the
private respondents.
(iv) The said exercise shall be completed by the
respondent authorities within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order.
(v) There will be no order as to costs.
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
FR/NFR
Sushil
WP(C) No. 991 of 2021
