AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Devendra Kumar Arora, J.
Heard counsel for the parties.
By means of present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to pass appropriate orders and directions in pursuance to the Government Order dated 03.02.1994 for out of turn promotion on the post of Head Constable.
The submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that when the petitioner was posted in district Bahraich in the year 2001and working on the post of constable, while he was on patrolling on 18.01.2001 alongwith one Sri Ramgati Saroj, six persons armed with illegal fire arms surrounded the petitioner and his colleague. The petitioner caught hold of one Ashwani Kumar and the other persons snatched the rifle of the petitioner, thereafter hit the petitioner with Lathis, due to which the petitioner received several injuries. The other constable, who was at some distance, fired on the culprits, the petitioner then caught hold of Pappu alias Ram Nath. On hearing the noise the villagers reached at the place of occurrence and seeing them. Two culprits ran away from the place of occurrence, however, Pappu, Sipahi Lal, Aswini Kumar, Sanjai Kumar and Tandon Shukla were caught on the spot.
On 14.02.2001, the Superintendent of Police, Bahraich looking into the act of bravery of the petitioner and his colleagues recommended for out of turn promotion on the post of Head Constable in pursuance of the provisions of Government Order dated 03.02.1994 to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Devi Patan Range, Gonda.
When no action was taken on the recommendation of the Superintendent of Police, Bahraich, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation annexing the recommendation of the Superintendent of Police, Bahraich on 25.03.2002 (Annexure4 to the writ petition) and the last representation was submitted by the petitioner on 22.01.2007 (Annexure7 to the writ petition), copy whereof has been sent to the opposite party no.3.
The prayer of the counsel for the petitioner is that necessary direction be issued to the opposite party no.3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22.01.2007 by a speaking and reasoned order within a stipulated period of time fixed by this Hon''ble Court.
Learned Standing Counsel has no objection to the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner.
In view of the above and without entering into the merits of the case, the opposite party no.3 is hereby directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 22.01.2007, contained in Annexure2 to the writ petition, as per law, by a speaking and reasoned order, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and communicate the outcome of the same to the petitioner.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of finally.