Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ANIL MOHAN SHUKLA AND OTHERS versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' PRINCIPAL SEC. DEPTT. OF HOME & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Anil Mohan Shukla And Others v. State Of U.P. Thru' Principal Sec. Deptt. Of Home & Ors. - WRIT - A No. 15411 of 2003 [2006] RD-AH 6114 (21 March 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 9.

Writ Petition No. 15411 of 2003

Anil Mohan Shukla  and others       ...                 Petitioners

                                   Versus

State of U.P. and others                    ..                  Respondents.  

Hon. Sunil Ambwani, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.

The petitioners are serving as Constable (M).  They were appointed on compassionate ground on temporary basis on supernumerary posts. Having served for more than six years, They filed this writ petition, claiming promotion on the vacant posts of ASI(M).  They have also prayed for quashing order dated 31.12.2002 by which the State Government had promoted only those Constable (M)/ Paid Apprentice who belongs to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes categories.  The premises, on which the writ petition has been filed, is that though there are vacancies on the promotional posts of ASI(M)/Assistant Clerks/Assistant Accountants, they are only filling up by promotion to those  who belongs to SC/ST categories.

The State Government, in substance, admitted the grievance.  Inspite of repeated directions the respondents have, for apparent reasons, refused to disclose to this Court, the break-up of the various categories (reservations) of 1540 posts of ASI(M)/Assistant Clerks/Assistant Accountants filled up out of 1652 sanctioned posts.

On 16.9.2004, following order was passed:

"It is admitted in the Counter affidavit that the posts of A.S.I.(M) were filled up by promotion from amongst eligible candidates,

2

on the direction of the then Hon'ble Chief Minister.  The exercise was made to fill up only back log vacancies belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes categories.  In para 10 of the Counter affidavit of Sri B.P. Misra, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Police Headquarters, Allahabad, it is stated that after filling up the vacant posts in SC./ ST. categories, there is no vacancy left on  general category posts.  The promotions were made only to up  the  back log vacancies existing in SC/ ST category.  

In the rejoinder affidavit of Sri Anil Mohan Shukla posted in the office of Commandant 42 Battalion P.A.C. Naini, Allahabad, the details of the sanctioned posts and the vacancies have been annexed.  The Chart shows that there are 1652 of  posts of ASI(M)/Assistant Clerk/Accountants, out of which  only 1540 has been filed up.  According to this chart there are still 112 existing vacancies.  The break up of the various  categories for these posts (reservation wise)  has not been given.

In order to ascertain the correct position with regard to availability of vacancies on the post of ASI(M),  and to decide this writ petition, it is necessary to find out the exact number of sanctioned posts and the vacancies

3

available.  Let a supplementary counter affidavit be filed by the State Government giving details of vacancies, with break up of categories and reservation.

The supplementary counter affidavit shall also disclose as to how the appointment letter was issued directing the appointment of Sri Arun Kumar as Constable (M), and to allow him to take over, on the post of ASI(M) on the very date.   This affidavit shall be filed within a period of  three weeks .  List on 15.10.2004.  A copy of this order shall be given to the Chief Standing Counsel for compliance within a week.

Dt. 16.9.2004."

A supplementary rejoinder affidavit has been filed today annexing therewith the proposals sent by the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Establishment), Police Headquarters, U.P. on 2.1.2006 to the Secretary  (Home) Police, Government of U.P. giving proposals for carrying out the declaration made by the Hon'ble the Chief Minister on the "Police Smrit Divas 2005".

A perusal of the proposals, admit the grievance of the petitioner and similarly situate Constables(M) who are appointed on fixed pay and have been denied promotional position and promotion for a long period of time.  Paragraph 5 of the proposals clearly admit that only SC/ST categories have been promoted on the post of ASI(M) and that the future of the persons ,similar to the petitioners, including petitioners, is in dark as there are no chance of promotion.  There are about 961 Constable (M) appointment on temporary basis with no chance of promotion which has given rise to dis-satisfaction in service.  

4

They have been given six months basic training with knowledge of computer but the lack of promotional opportunities and regular pay is coming in the way of their efficiency and performance.

I find that the proposals made by the Head Quarters to give all the Constables(M) working on fixed pay on temporary basis, to be given regular pay scale of ASI(M) is in parity consonance with other departments where compassionate appointment is offered on the post of routine grade clerk, clerk post will take care of the grievances.  Further I find that with large number of causalities in police, results into large number of  compassionate appointments.    These persons  cannot be left high and dry with uncertain future.  They are dependents of the policemen who have died on duty and deserve better treatment.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are restrained from making any further promotion on the post of ASI(M) or make any direct appointment to the post of ASI(M)/Assistant Clerk/Assistant Accountant, until the recommendation referred to above, are considered by the State Government  and a final view is taken.  An interim mandamus is issued to the respondents to either implement the recommendation or show cause by filing reply within six weeks.

List this matter again for hearing on 8.5.2006.

Dt. 21.3.2006.

BM/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.