Vimleshwar Prasad Raturi And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Alok Singh, J

Petitioners were appointed as Constable (M) in the State of U.P. In 2000, State of Uttarakhand was carved out from State of U.P. and petitioners,

who were working as Constable (M), had been transferred from State of U.P. to State of Uttarakhand. In the Police Department, there are five

branches viz. Police Headquarter, District Police, GRP, LIU and Intelligence. For the ministerial cadre posts, in all the five branches, Constable (M) is

the feeding cadre post of Assistant Sub Inspector (M). Petitioners were working as Constable (M) in different branches of Police Department except

Police Headquarters. In Police Headquarter, at the relevant, no post of Constable (M) was sanctioned. In order to fill up the post of Assistant Sub

Inspector (M) in police headquarter, respondent Department decided to prepare a combined seniority list of all the branches and in the seniority list,

petitioners’ names were figured between 24 and 47. 32 posts of Assistant Sub Inspector (M) were vacant in the police headquarter and in other

branches, no post of Assistant Sub Inspector (M) was vacant. On 14.01.2005, promotional exercise was initiated and a committee was constituted.

Selection was made on the basis of seniority subject to rejection of unfit. After due selection, petitioners were promoted as Assistant Sub Inspector

(M) in police headquarters. While promoting the petitioners on the post of Assistant Sub Inspector (M), Additional Director General of Police (Admin)

took an undertaking from the petitioners that they will not put any claim for police headquarter branch. Feeling aggrieved, petitioners have approached

this Court.

Heard Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. M.S. Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand and perused the record.

Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for the petitioner submits that since there was no post of Constable (M) sanctioned, which is a feeding cadre post,

therefore, police department decided to fill up the post of Assistant Sub Inspector (M) from other branches. If the police department had not adopted

this method, then there would be no other way to fill up the post of Assistant Sub Inspector (M). The source of recruitment of Constable (M) in all the

branches is one. The criterion for allotment of branch to Constable (M) is that top meritorious candidates would go in the police headquarters and rest

would go in other branches as per their merits. There are no separate service rules for ministerial cadre in all the five branches. Due to the

undertaking, all the promotional avenues of the petitioners are at stake and Additional Director General of Police (Admin.) was not competent either to

take undertaking from the petitioners or to frame Rules.

Mr. M.S. Bisht, learned Brief Holder fairly conceded that there are no separate service rules for ministerial cadre in all the five branches.

There is no dispute that petitioners are working as ASI (M) in the police headquarters. Once the petitioners have been promoted as ASI (M) and

born in the headquarters cadre, respondents cannot say that petitioners will not put any claim for police headquarters cadre. Therefore, undertaking

taken by the respondents is bad in the eyes of law. Petitioners had not misrepresented the respondent Department while obtaining the promotion.

Respondent Department itself initiated the promotional exercise to fill up the post of Assistant Sub Inspector (M) otherwise, there was no other way.

Five branches do not have separate Service Rules for ministerial cadre employees. Therefore, there is no restriction in switching from one cadre to

another. Moreover, it is stated in the counter affidavit that higher meritorious candidates are posted in police headquarters and rest of the selected

candidates are posted in District Police Cadre, who may be transferred / posted in any district police headquarter, PAC, GRP etc. Meaning thereby

source of recruitment of Constable (M) in all cadres is one.

In view of the above discussion, writ petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to merge the petitioners in police headquarters cadres and grant

all consequential benefits, for which they are entitled.