Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sobran Singh Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 June, 2022
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S Bhatti
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S BHATTI
ON THE 23rd OF JUNE, 2022
WP-03890-2018
Between:-
1. SURESH KUMAR VISHWKARMA S/O SHRI
DWARIKA PRASAD VISHWKARMA , AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE
(POLICE) NO. 556, AT PRESENT POSTED AT P.S.
KOLGAWAN (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SUNIL TOMAR S/O GAYA PRASAD , AGED
ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE
SAF GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. RAJENDRA SINGH S/O PARMAL SINGH , AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE
NO 593 13 TH BATTALION A COMPANY SAG
GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. DHARMVEER SINGH S/O BHAGWAN SINGH ,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
CON S TAB LE NO 567 1 3 T H B ATTALION A
COMPANY SAF GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. LAXMI NARAYAN PYASI S/O RAMCHANDRA
PYASI , AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HEAD CONSTABLE M T 695 AT PRESENT
POSTED AT D R P LINE REWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
6. SONAL JHA D/O LATE V K JHA , AGED ABOUT 35
YEARS, OCCUPATION: ASI (M) I G ( P ) OFFICE
REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI D.K. TRIPATHI, ADVOCATE )
AND
Signature Not Verified
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT
SAN
Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR
MANTRALALAYA VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL
CHATURVEDI
Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST (MADHYA PRADESH)
2
2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE POLICE
HEAD QUARTER S JAHIGIRABAD (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE REWA ZONE
REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE SATNA SATNA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI GIRISH KEKRE, GOVT. ADVOCATE)
WRIT PETITION No. 3890 of 2018
Between:-
SOBRAN SINGH YADAV S/O SHRI GOPAL SINGH
YADAV , AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
A.S.I. AT PRESENT POSTED AT P.S. NOORBAD
MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI D.K. TRIPATHI, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT
MANTRALAYA, VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE POLICE
HEAD QUARTER S JAHANGIRABAD (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE REWA REWA
ZONE, (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SATNA DISTT-
SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI GIRISH KEKRE, GOVT. ADVOCATE)
Signature Not Verified
SAN
WRIT PETITION No. 7322 of 2018
Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR
CHATURVEDI Between:-
Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST
UMESH KUMAR VISHWKARMA S/O
3
RAMDARSAN VISHWKARMA , AGED ABOUT 29
YEAR S , OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE (DRIVER
OLD NO. 381 AS WAS SATNA NOW 78 AS IS
SIDHI) POSTED AT PRESENT POLICE LINE SIDHI
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI D.K. TRIPATHI, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT
MANTRLAYA VALLABH BHAWAN (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE POLICE
HEADQUARTERS JAHANGIRABAD, (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE REWA REWA
ZONE, (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SATNA DISTT-
SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI GIRISH KEKRE, GOVT. ADVOCATE)
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
This order shall govern disposal of W.P. No.7322/2018 and W.P. No.3890/2018 as well.
2. For the sake of clarity and convenience the facts of W.P. No.3255/2018 are being taken note of.
3. The facts adumbrated in a nutshell are that the petitioners herein, who are working with the Department of Police as well as Special Armed Force Signature Not Verified SAN against the posts of Constable/Head Constable/Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI), were deputed on duty to carry out anti dacoit operation in the month of Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR CHATURVEDI Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST 4 November, 2011. Accordingly, three teams were constituted, which were led by the then Inspector General of Police, Rewa. All the teams consisted of as many as 35 personnel holding different posts in the Department of Police/Special Armed Force.
4. The teams carried out the operation and in the operation as many as five dacoits were killed, who were proclaimed offenders. Thus, performance of the teams was taken note of by the Department and the then Inspector General of Police, Rewa who was leading the teams, recommended out of turn promotion to the present petitioners and other team members, who played important role in the entire operation. Promotions were to be made in terms of Regulation 70-A of the M.P. Police Regulations. However, out of turn promotions were granted only to 18 police personnel out of 35 and remaining 17 police personnel including the present petitioners, were given only cash reward of Rs.10,000/- each.
5. The petitioners earlier preferred a writ petition forming the subject-matter of W.P. No.21680/2012, which was disposed of with a direction to the Director General of Police to consider and decide the petitioners cases for out of turn promotion in the light of recommendation which was contained in Annexure-P/5 of the said writ petition. However, the Director General of Police vide impugned communication contained in Annexure-P/1 issued on 20- 11-2017, rejected the petitioners' representation and thus, declined to confer the benefit of out of turn promotion to the petitioners.
6. Learned counsel for petitioners strenuously urged that the impugned order has been passed in a purely mechanical manner by respondent Signature Not Verified SAN No.2. The respondent No.2 merely on the basis of FIR of the incident formed Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR CHATURVEDI an opinion that the present petitioners did not play any active role in the anti Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST 5 dacoit operation. The respondent No.1 observed that some of the present petitioners did not play any role at the field, therefore, concluded that they were not entitled for the benefit of out of turn promotion. Learned counsel submits that this finding is contrary to the directives issued by this Court in the earlier round of litigation, whereby this Court specifically directed the respondent No.2 to consider the cases of the petitioners for out of turn promotion in the light of the recommendations. However, the recommendations of the head of the team i.e. Inspector General of Police, Rewa have not at all been dealt with in the impugned order, and in a purely mechanical and highhanded manner, the representation has been rejected. Thus, the learned counsel for petitioners prays that while setting aside the impugned order, the respondents be directed to confer the benefit of out of turn promotion to the petitioners in terms of Regulation 70-A of the Police Regulations.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents/State submits that the authorities have considered the role played by the present petitioners and having considered their respective roles found that they were entitled for reward of Rs.10000/- each and the petitioners were not found entitled for out of turn promotion. Therefore, the decision taken by the authorities cannot be interfered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties; bestowed anxious consideration to the rival submissions raised at the Bar; and perused the records.
9. Before dealing with the controversy, it is germane to refer Signature Not Verified SAN provision of Regulation 70-A of the Police Regulations, which is reproduced Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR below :
CHATURVEDI Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST"70-A. Notwithstanding anything contained in Regulation 6 70, a Constable may be promoted to the rank of Head Constable by the Superintendent of Police with the prior approval of the Director General of Police and a Head Constable to the tank of Assistant Sub-Inspector by the Deputy Inspector General of Police with the prior approval of the Director General of Police if he has distinguished himself in anti dacoit operations, law and order situations of shooting competitions or in some other field of duty or who has been awarded the President's Police Medal for Gallantry or for meritorious/distinguished services, if he considers him suitable for promotion. Similarly, the Inspector General of Police may promote an Assistant Sub-Inspector to the rank of Sub- Inspector and as Sub-Inspector to the rank of an Inspector on similar grounds if found suitable for promotion and subject to the prior approval of the Director General of Police. The number of Officers promoted under this Regulation shall not exceed 10 per cent."
10. The machinery of law in the present case was set in motion on the basis of an information given at the behest of an informant of the police on 23-12-2011 to the effect that at a remote place near Haldigaon in hilly terrain a gang of dacoits is spotted and thus, a prompt decision was taken to form three different teams, which were assigned the operation to catch hold of the dacoits. Three teams consisting of as many as 35 police personnel holding different posts right from Constable to Inspector General of Police were constituted. The teams carried out the operation at around 6 a.m. on 24-04-2011 and the conflict between the teams and gang of dacoits continued for long period of two hours. As a consequence of the combat 5 proclaimed dacoits were killed.
Signature Not Verified SANIn the operation many police personnel sustained injuries and even injuries as a Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR result of gunshots. Thus, extinction of dacoits restored trust and faith in the CHATURVEDI Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST 7 police force amongst the residents of Districts Rewa, Satna, Banda, Panni and Karbi etc. where these dacoits were active and were also threat to the public at large.
11. Thus, while taking into consideration this important anti dacoit operation, the Department decided to extend the benefit of out of turn promotion to the police personnel, who were part of the operation. As a result of which, out of 35 police personnel benefit of out of turn promotion under Regulation 70-A of the Police Regulations was extended to as many as 18 police personnel and remaining 17 were declined the said benefit.
12. The role played by the present petitioners in the anti dacoit operation, has been elaborately discussed, by head of the team in his recommendation. A perusal of the documents filed along with Annexure-P/3 reveals that the head of the team, elaborately discussed the roles played by each member of the team. For example, one of the petitioners Sobran Singh, who himself sustained injuries but still continued to participate in the operation actively. Simultaneously, another petitioner Sonal Jha though was monitoring the operation and providing feeds to team from the Office Cyber Cell, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Rewa. She was tracking location of the dacoits with the aid of GPS/technical support system and supplying the information to teams. Thus, a vital role was played by one of the petitioners Sonal Jha.
13. Other petitioner Laxminarayan Pyasi who was driver and had taken the team to remote place, also attributed important role in the operation, inasmuch as the place was not motorable, being a hilly terrain. Thus, the expertise of the petitioner Laxminarayan as a trained driver was also found to be Signature Not Verified SAN useful in the course of the operation. Another petitioner, Dharamveer Singh Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR CHATURVEDI Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST was also a part of the operation team and he was at the field during combat with 8 dacoits. Same role was played by other petitioners, namely, Sunil Tomar and Suresh Vishwakarma as well. As gunshots were being fired by both sides, thus each member of the team was at risk of being injured or even dead in crossfire.
14. Thus, the moot question that arises for consideration, as to whether the operation which was carried out by the Police/Special Armed Forces on 24-12-2011 could have been carried out, without the role played by each of the petitioners herein. In an operation like this even a member of the team who was not at the field, but was engaged in the monitoring movement of the dacoits while sitting in office through GPS and giving feedback to the team deployed at the field, plays a key role and, therefore, cannot be ignored. Simultaneously, a driver who takes entire team to the site of the operation also play a significant role, as in the event of sudden attack/assault at the instance of dacoits risk of being shot, in such an operation, cannot be ruled out.
15. Therefore, apparently, each of the member of the team who were at the site where the operation was carried out was in vulnerable position of being injured or shot dead. Hence, such operations, in fact, are collective efforts and cannot be performed individually. Indubitably, needless to emphasize, entire operation is preplanned while role of each member of team was assigned in advance and, therefore, the each member of the team discharged his duty as per task assigned to him. The operation was turned out to be successful being a team effort.
16. A Division Bench of this Court in State of M.P. and others vs. Mahendra Kumar Sharma, [2008(1) MPLJ 320] while referring to Signature Not Verified SAN provision of Rule 70-A of M.P. Police Regulations held that even in an Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR appropriate High Court can issue direction for promotion, particularly when a CHATURVEDI Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST 9 case of discrimination is made out. In para 8 of the judgment it is held as under:
"8. On this root question, whether writ Court should directly order for promotion of an employee or should only give direction to consider his case for promotion, as per the decision of the constitutional Bench, it is true that generally in such cases the Court should not order for directing promotion to the employee and direction should be given to consider the case. As per Regulation 70-A, if the appellant is found suitable for promotion he can be granted out of turn promotion. It is also true that in the return, State has not stated anything that the respondent was not found otherwise unsuitable for promotion on any other ground. Therefore, if the respondent was found suitable then he was entitled for out of turn promotion. While rejecting the case of the respondent, Screening Committee has not recorded such a finding that he is not fit for promotion. Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India while issuing the mandamus the High Court is fully competent in appropriate cases to issue such directions. If the circumstance permits and case is made out legally and if it is found that the person was not otherwise found unsuitable for promotion and a case of discrimination is made out, then certainly there cannot be any embargo on the powers of the High Court to issue such a directions. In this case under the circumstances brought on record and explained in the order, learned Single Judge has already directed to promote the respondent w.e.f. 27-5-2003. Therefore, we do not find any ground to interfere in such direction nor such a direction is contrary to law. However, it is made clear that at the time of issuing promotion order the respondent shall be free to consider that the respondent is not otherwise unsuitable for Signature Not Verified SAN promotion."Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR CHATURVEDI Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST
17. Again, while dealing with a case of out of turn promotion in 10 terms of Regulation 70-A of the Police Regulations, Division Bench of this Court in the case of Suresh Pal Singh vs. State of M.P. and others, [2012(1) MPLJ 348] ruled thus :
"12. We are of the view that out of turn promotion in terms of Regulation 70-A of Madhya Pradesh Police Regulations is not a matter of legal right. It is within the discretion of the competent authority of the respondents to grant or not to grant out of turn promotion. But exercise of administrative discretion by the Department must not be vitiated by any unreasonableness, irrationality, prejudice or any bias........"
[emphasis supplied]
18. In the case of Kedar Singh vs. State of M.P. & others, 2012 SCC OnLine 1944 this Court held as under :
"5. A bare perusal of Annexure P-1 and P-3 shows that in the incident wherein petitioner, Arun Kumar and Bhupendra Singh were members of the police party, it is clear that their nature and degree of performance is exactly identical. The respondents in their return have not stated that petitioner was considered for out of turn promotion but either was not found fit or there were paucity of posts for his promotion. In the meantime, similar petition of Bhupendra Singh in W.P. No. 6263/09(s) came up for hearing and is decided by this Court on 24.1.2012. Needless to mention that Bhpendra Singh and present petitioner are sailing in the same boat and are exactly similarly situated. This Court by taking into account the nature of recommendations in their favour, the provisions of Police Regulations and other relevant factors allowed the petition and directed the respondents to consider the case of the Signature Not Verified SAN petitioner for grant of out of turn promotion in terms of Regulation Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR 70-A of Police Regulations. The decision is directed to be taken CHATURVEDI Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST before 30.4.2012."11
[Emphasis supplied]
19. In Bhupendra Singh Tomar vs. State of M.P. and others, [2012(2) MPLJ 218, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court observed as under :
"8. According to me, the procedure so adopted by the department is wholly arbitrary, since strong recommendation was made in favour of the petitioner by the Superintendent of Police. It appears that on account of the verdict given by the Inspector General of Police, the recommendation was amended deleting the name of the petitioner."
[Emphasis supplied]
20. Recently, this Court in W.P. No.2850/2012 (S) - Ramlakhan vs. State of M.P. & others, decided on 4-9-2019 held as under:
"10. On bare perusal of the order passed by Division Bench of this Court on 13-10-2008, which reveals that this Court gave a specific finding to the effect that the petitioner was awarded for actively participating in the encounter. It was further held that there is absolutely no material to discriminate the petitioner to the other 13 police personnel who were awarded for their active participation in the encounter. The order in writ appeal passed by Division Bench had attained finality since it was not challenged in the Supreme Court. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled for out of turn promotion which has already been decided in his favour in the earlier round of litigation."
[Emphasis supplied]
21. As a guiding factor, it would be apposite to refer to a press Signature Not Verified SAN release issued by Delhi Police on 9-01-2022. The same is reproduced Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR CHATURVEDI hereunder :
Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST"New Delhi : At least seven police personnel were on 12 Friday awarded with 'Out of Turn' (OTP) promotions for displaying extraordinary courage and dedication in 2020.
These personnel helped the police in nabbing most- wanted gangsters, extortionist, snatchers and solving multiple sensitive crimes by risking their lives.
Such was the work done by constable Rajiv Chaudhary, who is one among the seven personnel who was given recognition. Despite knowing that the assailants are armed, he not only caught the suspect but also sustained bullet injury in his face and is still in the ICU for the serious injuries he faced in line of duty.
The other police personnel who have been awarded with promotions are - Constable Kulbhushan, Sandeep Kumar, Rakesh Sharma, Deepak Karanwal, Praveen Kumar and Jaswant. All these police personnel are associated with different branches of Dwarka District including cyber cell and technical teams.
Constable Kulbhushan and Sandeep were awarded OTP for nabbing armed gangsters in Najafgarh area after a brief encounter between police and the criminals in July. Police said, the arrested criminals were involved in various extortion calls and were also threatening businessmen to cought up 'protection money' or get killed.
Head Constable Rakesh Sharma and Deepak Karanwal were awarded for solving incidents of snatching in Dwarka and arresting the snatchers by analysing 450 CCTV cameras from different crime scenes. Constable Jaswant and Praveen Kumar were given promotions for catching heavily-Signature Not Verified SAN
armed criminals in Nazafgarh area. The arrested criminals Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR CHATURVEDI Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST were given promotions for catching heavily-armed criminals 13 in Nazafgarh area. The arrested criminals had abducted a foreign national of Bulgaria for ransom and were in possession of sophisticated illegal firearm at the time of arrest.
Applauding their efforts, DCP S.K. Meena, Dwarka District said, "these promotions will help in providing additional investigating officers to the Dwarka District and other investigating units. The contributions made by the cyber cells have also been recognised... This will boost morale of over 2000 police personnel posted in district to excel in their duties."
[Emphasis supplied] The aforesaid press release issued by Delhi Police shows that, officials who were monitoring culprits from cyber cells and were members of technical teams, were also extended the benefit of out of turn promotion.
22. Thus, if the performance of petitioners in the present case is taken note of in the light of the above decisions and press release of Delhi Police, as detailed herein-above, petitioners also deserve consideration of their names for out of turn promotion as per Regulation 70-A of the Police Regulations.
23. Thus, this Court has no hesitation to hold that since it was a collective effort to carry out the anti dacoit operation which turned out to be successful, but the said success cannot solely be attributed to those 18 persons only who were awarded out of turn promotion as per provisions of Regulation 70-A of the M.P. Police Regulations. In the considered view of this Court the Signature Not Verified operation was successful, as a result of team work and the petitioners herein, SAN Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR were part of the team and played their respective roles, specially assigned to CHATURVEDI Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST them in quite promptitude. Therefore, they cannot be discriminated, as far as 14 the benefit of conferment of out of turn promotion is concerned. It is unfortunate, that the Department instead of appreciating the performance of the petitioners caused discrimination and decided to give reward of Rs.10000/- each. The order impugned dated 20-11-2017 does not deal with recommendations of the then Inspector General of Police, Rewa.
24. In the considered view of this Court the act of respondents in rewarding the present petitioners Rs.10000/- each was deplorable and in fact, was also an attempt to lower down morale of brave police personnel, who fearlessly and bravely participated in the anti dacoit operation and discharged their duties diligently. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view, the petitioners deserve consideration of their names for out of turn promotion, as extended to other 18 other police personnel of the team.
25. Consequently, the impugned order dated 20-11-2017 (Annexure- P/1) is quashed. Respondents No.1 and 2 are directed to consider the benefit of out of turn promotion to the petitioners in the light of recommendation (Annexure-P/3) within a period of 90 days from the date of production of certified copy of the order passed today and confer the benefit with effect from the date when other 18 police personnel were granted the said benefit, with all consequential benefits.
One of the petitioner Sobran Singh, though has been recommended for award of police medal only, but recommendations reveal that he also sustained injuries while shifting injured constables from the site for treatment. Thus, his case shall also be considered in above terms.
Signature Not Verified SAN26. Accordingly, the writ petitions stand allowed in the above Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR CHATURVEDI term.
Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST 15(MANINDER S BHATTI) JUDGE ac Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR CHATURVEDI Date: 2022.07.01 18:37:14 IST