Dismissed

Abid Ali v. Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment and Promotion Board and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Jan 2021WRIA/11602/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging denial of promotion to Computer Operator was dismissed. Court held post is direct recruitment, thus no promotion possible. De facto discharge of duties does not confer promotion or salary benefits for higher post.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's writ petition commands for issuance of writ commanding promotion was dismissed.

Abid Ali Vs Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment and… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11602 of 20206 Petitioner :- Abid Ali Respondent :- Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment And Promotion Board And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Singh,Manvendra Nath Singh,Vinod Kumar Singh(Senior Adv.) Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent.

¶5

By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No.1 namely U.P. Police Recruitment and Promotion Board to consider and decide the petitioner's application for promotion on the post of Assistant Sub Inspector (Clerk)/ Computer Operator in view of the recommendation made by respondent No.3 in the year 2015.

¶6

The submission of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed on 10.05.2020 on the post of Computer Operator on temporary basis. It further reflects from the record that an examination was held on 06.01.2003 for appointment to the post of Cook/Kahar pursuant to an order dated 30.11.2002 of U.P. Police Head Quarter, Allahabad wherein the petitioner had been declared successful candidate after verification of his character and medical examination. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Cook/Kahar on 09.01.2003 w.e.f. from the date itself on temporary basis in the pay scale of 2550-55, 5660-60-3200.

¶7

The contention of the petitioner is that he had discharged the duties of Computer Operator from the date of appointment on the post of Cook and had also underwent training as Computer Operator. The submission, thus, is that the petitioner is entitled to be promoted on the post of Computer Operator, in as much as, he possess essential qualification and requisite experience to the said post.

¶8

It is then contended that the respondent No.3 had made a recommendation in this regard in the year 2015 that the petitioner is entitled to be appointed on the post of Computer Operator.

¶9

Considering the said submission, a pointed query was made by

¶10

the Court to the learned counsel for the petitioner to place the relevant rules which provided for promotion to the post of Computer Operator or to place before the Court that the Computer Operator is a promotional post.

¶11

In reply, only Uttar Pradesh Police Clerk, Accountant & Secret Assistant Cadre Service Rules have been placed before the Court to assert that the promotional avenues are available in the department on Class-III post and the petitioner being a class IV employee is entitled to be promoted to a Class III post be it to a post of Assistant Sub Inspector (Clerk) or Computer Operator. A perusal of the Rule 17 of Rules 2016 indicates that the post of Computer Operator is a direct recruitment post. No promotion as such can be given on the said post. Even otherwise for promotion in other post in class III category as per the requisite rules, it is open for the petitioner to participate in the process of promotion as per the said rules.

¶12

In any case, for the mere fact that the petitioner had discharged the duties of Computer Operator while appointed on the post of Cook/Kahar a class IV post, salary or any other benefit of the said post cannot be given to the petitioner.

¶13

For the above, the writ petition is found misconceived and hence dismissed .

¶14

Order Date :- 13.1.2021 Himanshu

Abid Ali v. Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment and Promotion Board and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abid Ali v. Uttar Pradesh Police Recruitment and Promotion Board and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kuldeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

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

Ram Prakash Upadhaya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Narendra Bahadur Singh Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Jayprakash Saroj Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others