K. Venkatesh vs Union of India

S. Abdul Nazeer, J.—The petitioner had joined CRPF as the Deputy Superintendent of Police on 15.8.1986. In the year 1989, peace in the valley was disturbed due to sudden spurt in the militant activities. Accordingly, 54 Battalion, CRPF, a company headed by the petitioner was deployed in Srinagar for conducting special operations. He was then picked up by the IGP Operations, Srinagar, as one of the commanders of the Special Task Force.

It is the contention of the petitioner that as an officer incharge of the Special Task Force, CRPF, he gathered information that more than 50 militants belonging to a militant groups were taking shelter in a village Kalarush in Kupawara District, Jammu and Kashmir. Being a group leader, he divided his team into three groups and carried out the attack operation. During the operation on 11.10.1990, he suffered bullet injuries. The IGP of CRPF, Srinagar, has issued appreciation letter at Annexure ''A'' to the petitioner. He was also awarded the wound medal as per Annexure ''B''. It is further contended that he is entitled for award of the President''s Police Medal as per the notification dated 1.3.1951. Therefore, he made a representation to the Hon''ble Home Minister as per Annexure ''F'', which appears to have been referred to the second respondent and the second respondent sent a communication at Annexure ''E'' informing him that he is not entitled for the President''s Police Medal. Therefore, he has filed this writ petition for quashing the communication at Annexure ''E'' and for a mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation at Annexure ''F'' and award President''s Police Medal.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

The notification dated 1.3.1951, a copy of which has been produced on 24.6.2014 provides for award of President''s Police Medal. It states that recommendations for award on the ground of conspicuous gallantry shall be made as soon as possible after the occasion of which the conspicuous gallantry was shown and in special circumstances recommendations for awards on other grounds may be made at any time for an immediate award. All the recommendations shall state the name and rank of the person recommended, the name of the Police Force, or the Unit of the Central Police/Security Organizations of which he is or was a Member and particulars of the gallantry of service for which the grant of the medal is recommended. The notification also states the circumstances under which the medal can be awarded, which is as under:

"4. The medal shall be awarded:

(i) For conspicuous gallantry in saving life and property, or in the preventing crime or arresting criminals, the risks incurred being estimated with due regard to the obligations and duties of the officer concerned.

(ii) A special distinguished record in police service or in the Central Police/Security Organizations.

(iii) Success in organizing Police Service or the Units of Central Police/Security Organization or in maintaining their organizations under special difficulties.

(iv) Special Service in dealing with serious or wide spread out breaks of crime or public disorder.

(v) Prolonged service, but only when distinguished by very exceptional ability and merit."

In the communication at Annexure ''E'', the reasons assigned for denying President''s Police Medal is that the petitioner has already been awarded wound medal. Secondly, he has filed the representation for award of gallantry medal after a gap of 21 years from the date of incident without any justified or valid reasons and thirdly, the records belonging to the concerned year have been weeded out.

It is to be stated here that the wound medal has been awarded as per the notification dated 17.1.1973. This notification does not provide for award of President''s Police Medal. The President''s Police Medal is awarded under the notification dated 1.3.1951. Therefore, there is no bar for award of President''s Police Medal as per the notification dated 1.3.1951.

The notification dated 1.3.1951 does not describe any period within which the petitioner has to seek for award of the medal. It is for the authorities, namely, the Police Force or the Unit of the Central Police/Security Organization of which he is or was a Member to recommend for grant of the medal for the gallantry service rendered. There is no bar in this notification for award of the medal because the petitioner has sought for this award after 21 years. Even though the records of the petitioner pertaining to his service have been destroyed, there is no bar for them to consider the documents which may be furnished by the petitioner in support of his contentions. I am of the view that the second respondent has to be reconsider the matter.

In the result, the writ petition succeeds and it is accordingly allowed in part. The communication at Annexure ''E'' issued by the second respondent is hereby quashed. The petitioner is permitted to furnish all the particulars/documents along with an additional representation to the second respondent. The second respondent is directed to consider the same in terms of the notification dated 1.3.1951 and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. No costs.