JUDGMENT : Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for consideration of his case for out of turn promotion as he has received Gallantry Award President Police Medal. FACTUAL MATRIX 3. The petitioner was appointed on the post of constable in Jharkhand Police having his date of birth 09.07.1979. The petitioner joined the said post on 15.05.2005 and presently, posted at Police Line, Jamshedpur. It is the case of the petitioner that when he was posted in the Palamau District Force, on 08.06.2012, the petitioner was a member of the team which had encountered extremists of PLFI and for the act of bravery on said date, the petitioner, on recommendation, was conferred with the Gallantry Award President Police Medal. In view of the Gallantry Award i.e. President Police Medal, the petitioner was granted out of turn promotion which apparent from letter dated 08.01.2016, issued under the signature of Inspector General of Police (Headquarters), Jharkhand to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jamshedpur for making available upto data service records/ service book etc. of the petitioner to the Police Headquarter with the signature of the petitioner on the enclosed undertaking proforma. 4. Vide order dated 26.04.2016, the Inspector General of Police (Headquarter), Jharkhand, Ranchi granted out of turn promotion to the petitioner and eight others in pursuance of the decision in the Meeting of the Promotion Committee dated 18.03.2016 headed by the Director General of Police, Jharkhand. By the said order the petitioner was promoted to the post of Hawaldar from 08.06.2012 (i.e. from the date of occurrence for which Gallantry Award conferred on the petitioner). Further it was mentioned in the order itself that though the petitioner would be granted benefit of seniority from the said date of out of turn promotion but monetary benefits of the petitioner would be considered and payable from the date of joining. 5. Thereafter, Kolhan Area Order No. 50/16 vide memo No. 849 dated 13.05.2016 issued by DIG, Singhbhum Kolhan Area to said effect followed by issuance of East Singhbhum District Order No. 2319/ 2016 issued vide memo No. 2139 dated 18.05.2016 by Senior Superintendent of Police, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur. 5. Thereafter, Kolhan Area Order No. 50/16 vide memo No. 849 dated 13.05.2016 issued by DIG, Singhbhum Kolhan Area to said effect followed by issuance of East Singhbhum District Order No. 2319/ 2016 issued vide memo No. 2139 dated 18.05.2016 by Senior Superintendent of Police, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur. The petitioner also received a copy of the order duly signed by the Director General of Police, Jharkhand dated 14.08.2015 congratulating and wishing the petitioner for being awarded with Police Medal for prevailing on the eve of Independence Day, 2015. It is the specific case of the petitioner that as per the prevailing Rule of Police Manual, the constable conferred with such Gallantry Award for bravery are to be given out of turn promotion straightway to the post of ASI of Police. 6. The bar/restriction of not promoting any constable to straightway to the post of ASI of Police has been notified by way of amendment in Police Manual, Rule 660 (ga), only in the year 2016, by notification No. 249 dated 28.01.2016, whereas, the petitioner has been granted the said out of turn promotion from 08.06.2012 (i.e. from the date of occurrence for which Gallantry Award conferred on the petitioner). When the case of the petitioner was not considered for grant of out of turn promotion on the post of ASI, the petitioner has knocked the door of this Court by filing the instant writ application. 7. Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in view of the notification dated 28.01.2016, the petitioner is entitled for out of turn promotion directly on the post of ASI but the respondent-authorities have not considered the case of the petitioner on the post of ASI and discriminated him from the said benefits. The respondents have not even taken care of the notification dated 28.01.2016, which stipulates that the Constable/ Hawaldar appointed in between 15.11.2000 to the date of issuance of the notification i.e. 28.01.2016 would be asked to give their voluntary option for choosing the existing law or amended rule and on that basis they would be given promotion in the next term. Accordingly, the said inspection was circulated to all concerned Superintendents of Police but the petitioner has not been considered in view of the said notification till date. 8. On the other hand, though no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents but Mr. Accordingly, the said inspection was circulated to all concerned Superintendents of Police but the petitioner has not been considered in view of the said notification till date. 8. On the other hand, though no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents but Mr. Chanchal Jain, learned JC to AG appearing for the respondents submits that in view of Rule 660 (c), petitioner’s case has already been considered for grant of out of turn promotion and he has already been promoted to the post of Head Constable, which is a promotion in the eyes of law. Learned counsel vehemently opposes the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner and argues that promotion is not a right. The Board has already considered the case of the petitioner and has given him out of turn promotion. 9. Be that as it may, having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the case of the petitioner has not been considered in proper perspective. By giving promotion to the petitioner, the respondents have not obliged the petitioner, rather, right accrued to the petitioner as respondents themselves have granted out of turn promotion. In view of Rule 660 (c) of the amended notification, the petitioner deserves to be promoted to the post of ASI and not to the post of Head Constable. 10. In view of the aforesaid observations, rules, guidelines, judicial pronouncements, I hereby direct the respondent No. 2 to consider the case of the petitioner for out of turn promotion to the post of ASI within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. Resultantly, the writ petition stands allowed.