Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 164 (HP)

Nathu Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2014-03-06

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2014
JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.(Oral): Pursuant to the orders passed on the previous date, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the copy of Circular No.PER(AP)-C-F (1)-2/2011-Vol.I, Government of Himachal Pradesh, Department of Personnel (AP-III), dated 30th October, 2013 whereby the respondent-State has taken a decision not to implement the 85th Amendment in the matter of promotion of the members of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe categories and also produced copy of the order of Hon’ble Apex Court passed in Interlocutory Application No.6 of 2012 in S.L.P. (Civil) No.30143 of 2009, titled “H.P. Scheduled Tribes Employees Federation and Anr. Versus Himachal Pradesh S.V.K.K. & Ors.” 2. This petition is filed with the following prayer:- “Directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and to promote the petitioner as Deputy Superintendent of Police from the due date with a consequential benefits i.e. from the date when his juniors were promoted as Deputy Superintendent of Police.” 3. The relief has been sought on the ground that since the juniors to the petitioner have been promoted to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, therefore, the petitioner has been discriminated against such juniors in the matter of promotion. The petitioner has also sought promotion on account of the being a Scheduled Tribe category candidate consequent upon 85th Amendment in the Constitution of India. Admittedly, the question of implementation of 85th Amendment in the Constitution of India in the State of Himachal Pradesh in the matter of providing reservation to the employees belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe categories in promotion also to the higher rank, has been considered by the respondent-State in terms of the directions of the Apex Court to take a decision in this behalf in Interlocutory Application No.6 of 2012 filed in S.L.P. (Civil) No.30143 of 2009, titled “H.P. Scheduled Tribes Employees Federation and Anr. Versus Himachal Pradesh S.V.K.K. & Ors.” The State Government, however, has taken a decision not to provide reservation in promotion to the members of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe categories as per the Constitution (85th Amendment-2001). Therefore, as per the position existing as of today, there is no provision of reservation in promotion to the members of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe categories in the State of Himachal Pradesh. 4. Therefore, as per the position existing as of today, there is no provision of reservation in promotion to the members of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe categories in the State of Himachal Pradesh. 4. If going through the reply filed by the respondent/State, the petitioner was considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee in its meeting held on 7.3.2009 alongwith two more officers in the zone of consideration for promotion to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police. The Departmental Promotion Committee has, however, assessed him ‘good’ as compared to his senior and junior, who were assessed as ‘very good’ and ‘out-standing’ respectively. Therefore, on merits also, being not found suitable, the petitioner has not been promoted to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police. 5. It is in this back-ground, learned counsel seeks permission to withdraw this petition. The petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. The petitioner, if so advised, may assail the Circular No.PER(AP)-C-F (1)-2/2011-Vol.I, dated 30th October, 2013 issue by the Department of Personnel whereby the respondent-State has taken a decision not to implement the Constitution (85th Amendment) in the matter of promotion to the members of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe categories. The petition stands disposed of.