Disposed

Brij Mohan Lal v. State of U.P. and 8 Others

Allahabad HC3 Jul 2018WRIA/12258/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking promotion of a Sub-Inspector to Inspector. The court directed the respondent to examine the petitioner's claim in the next promotion exercise if he comes in the zone of consideration, without adjudicating his claim on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be accorded consideration for promotion in the next fresh exercise if eligible and in zone of consideration; merits left open.

Brij Mohan Lal Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 58

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12258 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Brij Mohan Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Gautam,Krishna Ji Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

Following prayers are made in the writ petition:-

¶6

"(a). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned promotion order dated 28.2.2018 issued by the respondent no.3, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Law & Order/Establishment, DGP, Headquarters, U.P. Lucknow, only upto the extent by which the juniors to the petitioners have been promoted on the post of Inspector (enclosed as Annexure1) to the writ petition.

¶7

(b). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the promotion of petitioner from the post of SubInspector to the Inspector in pursuant of the final seniority list dated 12.2.2018 and in accordance with the provision of Rule-5 of the Uttar Pradesh Sub Inspector and Inspectors (Civil Police) Service Rules, 2015 and amendment made therein, with all consequential benefits.

¶8

(c). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to promote the petitioner from the post of Sub-Inspector to Inspector in pursuance of the seniority list dated 12.2.2018 and in accordance with the provision of Rule-5 of the Uttar Pradesh Sub-Inspector and Inspectors (Civil Police) Service Rules 2015 and amendment made therein, with all consequential benefits."

¶9

Writ petition has been entertained and time was allowed to learned Standing Counsel to obtain instructions and file short counter affidavit, on 22.5.2018. Despite grant of opportunity, learned Standing Counsel has not been able to obtain instructions.

¶10

When the matter is taken up, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner does not intend to press his first prayer clause made in the writ petition and the writ petition is being pressed with reference to prayer clause B only.

¶11

Petitioner has been appointed as Sub-Inspector in the year 2007. It is alleged that petitioner is in the zone of consideration for promotion to be made on the post of Inspector, but in the last recruitment exercise undertaken, his claim was not examined only because complete character roll entries were not forwarded to the Commission by the authorities concerned. It is stated that for such reason, the claim of petitioner has not been examined on the previous occasion. It is stated that a fresh exercise for effecting promotion is likely to be undertaken and a direction be

¶12

issued to examine petitioner's claim in accordance with law.

¶13

Learned Standing Counsel submits that grievance of the petitioner can be examined by respondent no.5 at the first instance.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction upon respondent no.5 to accord consideration to petitioner's claim for promotion, strictly in accordance with law, as and when a fresh exercise for promotion is undertaken, provided the petitioner comes in the zone of consideration and is otherwise eligible. Materials existing on the service records of petitioner would be examined by the Commission on its own merit and in accordance with law.

¶15

It is clarified that this Court has not adjudicated petitioner's claim for promotion on merits and all issues are left open to be examined by the Commission, at the first instance.

¶16

Order Date :- 3.7.2018 Ashok Kr.

Brij Mohan Lal v. State of U.P. and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brij Mohan Lal v. State of U.P. and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhola Nath Bharatiya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arun Kumar Singh and 14 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ved Pal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ashish Awasthi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikram Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raj Kumar Pratihar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others