Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 1105 (PAT)

Dinkar Prasad Singh v. State Of Bihar

2004-10-14

NARAYAN ROY

body2004
Judgment 1. Heard counsel for parties. 2. The petitioner by this application seeks direction upon the respondent authorities to consider his case for grant of out of turn promotion in the rank of Inspector of Police in view of the provisions of Rule 660(C) of the Bihar Police Manual (hereinafter to be referred to as "Manual"), as he had shown exemplary courage in nabbing a criminal, where bombs were exploded and he lost one of his legs. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner after sustaining injury was hospitalised and no sooner he recovered and was released from the hospital, the Superintendent of Police recommended his case for out of turn promotion vide letter no. 153 dated 24.3.1998. 4. On receipt of the recommendation of the Superintendent of Police, the Deputy Inspector General of Police also recommended for out of turn promotion to the petitioner vide letter no. 490 dated 18.4.1998, as contained in annexure 5. The matter thereafter again was examined by the Inspector General of Police (Administration) and he also recommended for out of turn promotion to the petitioner vide letter no. 372 dated 17.6.1998, but, ultimately, the claim of the petitioner was turned down by the Director General of Police and a direction was issued to the Superintendent of Police, Saran at Chapra, to suitably reward the petitioner and thereafter the petitioner was given a grant of Rs. 500/- (five hundred) in lieu of his exemplary performance. 5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of Rule 660(C) of the Manual the petitioner was entitled for out of turn promotion on the post of Inspector of Police, for which his case was recommended by the authorities concerned, as referred to above. It is further submitted by learned counsel that the police officials, who have shown lesser courage, have been granted out of turn promotion in light of the provisions as laid down in Rule 660(C) of the Manual, but the case of the petitioner has been discriminated. 6. Rule 660(C) of the Manual speaks of out of turn promotion and the Selection Board has been authorised to recommend out of turn promotion to the officer with outstanding records of service. 7. 6. Rule 660(C) of the Manual speaks of out of turn promotion and the Selection Board has been authorised to recommend out of turn promotion to the officer with outstanding records of service. 7. It appears from the materials on record that this power has been exercised by the Selection Board granting out of turn promotion to such officers, who had caught criminals or had shown exemplary courage. It further appears that this Court in similar circumstances considered the case of one Lalan Mahto V/s. State of Bihar and Ors. in C.W.J.C. No. 7557 of 1998, and directed the State authorities vide order, as contained in annexure 12, to consider the case of the petitioner for out of turn promotion. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, mere reward of Rs. 500/- (five hundred) would not justify the claim of the petitioner in light of the provisions as laid down in Rule 660(C) of the Manual as such reward is not covered under the provisions of Rule 660(C) of the Manual. 9. The authorities concerned, therefore, are required to consider the case of the petitioner afresh in light of the provisions of Rule 660(C) of the Manual, as referred to above. 10. In the result, this application is allowed and the authorities concerned are directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner for out of turn promotion and to recommend the same before the Selection Board for grant of out of turn promotion to the petitioner. This exercise, however, should be completed by the authorities concerned within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.