Uttarakhand High Court
Rajendra Singh Rawat And Others ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 28 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
THE JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
AND
JUSTICE SHRI RAMESH CHANDRA KHULBE
WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO.165 OF 2022
28TH MARCH, 2022
Between:
Rajendra Singh Rawat and Others ...... Petitioners
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand and Others ...... Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, learned counsel.
Counsel for the State : Mr. K.N. Joshi, learned Dy. Advocate
General for the State.
Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the
following
JUDGMENT: (per the Justice Shri Manoj Kumar Tiwari)
Petitioners were appointed by direct
recruitment as Sub-Inspector of Police in erstwhile State
of Uttar Pradesh. Petitioners belong to 1989-90 & 1998-
99 batch and they were appointed in U.P. Police.
2. By means of this writ petition, petitioners have
sought following reliefs:-
"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the
nature of certiorari to call for the record of case
and quash the impugned judgment and order
dated 30.10.2021 passed by the Learned
Uttarakhand Public Services Tribunal at Dehradun
in Claim Petition No. 80/DB/2020 titled as
"Rajendra Singh Rawat and others Versus State
of Uttarakhand and others" as well as the
impugned seniority list dated 29-04-2020.
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the
nature of mandamus directing the official
respondents to redraw the seniority of inspectors
having regard to the initial date of appointment
of Petitioners on the post of Sub-inspector and
consequently to give promotion to the Petitioners
on the post of Inspector with effect from the date
juniors to them were promoted on the post of
Inspector i.e. 15-09-2014 in compliance of
Government Order No. 1009/XX-1/2021-
01(26)/2020 dated 29th September 2021 and
pay them all consequential benefits."
3. It transpires that persons, who were appointed
by direct recruitment as Sub-Inspector in Uttarakhand
Police, after State Reorganization during the year 2002-
03, were promoted as Inspector in the year 2014; while,
claim of the petitioners for such promotion was not
considered. Subsequently, petitioners were also
promoted to the post of Inspector w.e.f. 15.10.2016.
However, in the seniority list of Inspectors issued on
29.04.2020, petitioners were treated as en-bloc junior to
persons appointed as Sub-Inspector in the year 2002-03.
Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioners approached Public
Services Tribunal by filing Claim Petition No.80/DB/2020,
seeking the following reliefs:-
"a. To issue order or direction to the
Respondents no. 1, 2 & 3 to call for records and
to quash the seniority list dated 29.04.2020
(Annexure:A2).
b. To issue order or direction to the
respondents No. 1 & 2 to give promotion to the
petitioners from the day the private respondents
who are juniors to the petitioners were promoted
i.e. from 15.09.2014 along with consequential
benefits.
c. To give any other relief fit and proper in
the circumstances of the case.
d. To give cost to the petitioners."
2
4. However, learned Tribunal declined to grant
the reliefs as claimed by petitioners by holding that
Inspector, Civil Police and Inspector LIU belong to two
different streams, on which, promotions are made
separately from Sub-Inspector, Civil Police and Sub
Inspector, LIU respectively. The judgment dated
30.10.2021 rendered by learned Tribunal has been
challenged by petitioners on various grounds.
5. Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioners has referred to Government Order
dated 29.09.2021, which is on record as Annexure-10 to
the writ petition.
6. Perusal of the said document reveals that after
considering the representations made against promotion
of junior persons to the post of Inspector in the year
2014, Police Headquarters had sought guidance from the
State Government and the State Government has
directed respondent no. 2 to hold review DPC for grant of
notional promotion to eligible persons, who could not be
promoted as Inspector in Civil Police in the year 2014.
7. Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner submits that since State Government
has come to the conclusion that due to non-consideration
of claim of senior persons for promotion in 2014 has
created an anomalous situation and the State
Government has now decided to take corrective steps, by
holding review DPC, therefore, petitioners have now
sanguine hope that their grievance regarding seniority
would be redressed. He further submits that if
petitioners are promoted from the date of promotion of
their juniors, then their seniority would also be re-
determined as per Rules. He, therefore, submits that the
3
writ petition may be disposed of in terms of Government
Order dated 29.09.2021.
8. The prayer made by learned counsel for the
petitioner is innocuous, therefore, worth accepting.
9. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of in
terms of the Government Order dated 29.09.2021 with
liberty to petitioners to approach the appropriate forum
at an appropriate stage, if need be.
___________________
MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.
______________
RAMESH CHANDRA KHULBE, J.
Dated: 28th MARCH, 2022
BS/SS
