AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.N. Ravindran, J.—Heard Sri. S.P. Aravindakshan Pillay, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Antony Mukkath, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
The petitioner retired from service as Assistant Director in the Kerala Police Academy which is a post equated to the post of Superintendent of Police (Non-IPS). He was directly recruited to the category of Sub Inspector of Police from the open market. He was later promoted to the category of Circle Inspector of Police. He was superseded for the promotion to the category of Deputy Superintendent of Police for the year 1996. Later, a Departmental Promotion Committee was held, the petitioner was found fit for promotion and was included as Sl. No. 23(a) in the select list for the year 1996 by Ext. P2 Government order dated 17.12.2005. In the meanwhile, his immediate junior Sri.V.V. Narayanan was promoted as Deputy Superintendent of Police based on his inclusion in the select list originally prepared. After the petitioner''s name was included in the select list for year 1996, he was also given notional promotion as Deputy Superintendent of Police with effect from 7.9.1997, the date on which Sri.V.V. Narayanan, his immediate junior was promoted.
As per the rules, 25% of officers in the category of Deputy Superintendent of Police are given ratio based senior grade. The petitioner was not given the said benefit though his junior Sri.V.V. Narayanan was given ratio based senior grade with effect from 1.4.2004. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner moved the Government. By Ext. P12 order passed on 25.1.2008, the Government while accepting the entitlement of the petitioner for the grant of senior grade with effect from 1.4.2004 held that he will not be entitled to back arrears consequent on the grant of senior grade notionally with effect from 1.4.2004. Ext. P12 to the extent it declines monetary benefits consequent on the grant of senior grade notionally with effect from 1.4.2004 is under challenge in this writ petition.
The respondents resist the writ petition contending that only 25% of the sanctioned cadre strength of Deputy Superintendents of Police namely 62 persons can be designated as Senior Grade Deputy Superintendents of Police. They contend that as the petitioner was not found fit for promotion till 2005, his juniors who superseded him were given ratio based promotion and as senior grade has been sanctioned to 25% of the sanctioned cadre strength of Deputy Superintendents of Police, the petitioner cannot be given the monetary benefits consequent on the grant of senior grade.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner''s name was included in the select list for the year 1996 and that he was placed above Sri. V.V.Narayanan, his immediate junior. It is also not in dispute that Sri.V.V. Narayanan was given ratio based senior grade with effect from 1.4.2004. The only objection put forward by the respondents for disbursement of monetary benefits to the petitioner consequent on the grant of senior grade with effect from 1.4.2004 is that senior grade can be sanctioned only to 25% of the cadre strength. In other words, they contend that only 62 officers in the category of Deputy Superintendent of Police which represents 25% of the cadre strength can be given senior grade and as the said number of officers have been sanctioned senior grade, monetary benefits cannot be disbursed to the petitioner and the petitioner will have to be satisfied with only notional senior grade promotion.
I have considered the submissions made at the Bar by the learned Counsel appearing on both sides. In my opinion, in the light of the stand taken by the Government in Ext.P2, the stand taken by the respondents in Ext.P12 and paragraph 23 of the counter affidavit cannot be sustained. It is admitted that Sri. V.V. narayanan, the petitioner''s junior who was placed below the petitioner in the select list that was modified by Ext.P2, was sanctioned ratio based senior grade with effect from 1.4.2004. If that be so, the petitioner is also entitled to ratio based senior grade with effect from that date. In fact the Government conceded his entitlement for senior grade with effect from that date. The only objection to the disbursement of monetary benefits is that ratio based senior grade promotion can be given only to 62 Deputy Superintendents of Police. In my opinion, the stand taken by the Government is plainly untenable. If the petitioner''s junior can be given ratio based promotion and also paid monetary benefits, I find no reason why the petitioner can be denied the same. The petitioner was superseded for no fault of his. If the supersession was illegal, the petitioner cannot be visited with the consequences of such supersession. I therefore hold that the petitioner was entitled to ratio based grade promotion with effect from 1.4.2004 as was given to Sri. V.V. Narayanan, his immediate junior.
In the result, the writ petition is allowed, Ext. P12 to the extent it denies to the petitioner monetary benefits with effect from 1.4.2004 consequent on ratio based senior grade promotion is quashed. It is declared that the petitioner is entitled to monetary benefits pursuant to the grant of senior grade with effect from 1.4.2004. The respondents shall compute and pay to the petitioner arrears of salary and allowances upon such basis. This shall be done within three months from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before the Secretary to Government, Department of Home Affairs.