Supreme Court Directs State to Consider Absorption of Temporary Sub-Inspector into Supernumerary Police Posts. Government Must Consider Case of Officer Who Claimed Temporary Promotion in February 1976 and Reversion in May 1983 in Accordance with Rules for Temporary Promotion and Confirmation Under Police Officer Manual Para 191.

In Favour of Accused
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The litigation arose from service matters concerning the absorption of a temporary Sub-Inspector into supernumerary posts created by the Government. The appellant, who was a temporary Sub-Inspector, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court challenging his reversion. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, leading the appellant to file a special leave petition before the Supreme Court. Pending appeal, the Government issued proceedings dated 01-12-1984 sanctioning the creation of 1300 supernumerary posts of civil police in the pay scale of Rs 515-860, stipulating that only those officiating Sub-Inspectors who had officiated for three years or more up to 30-09-1984 would be absorbed. On 19-04-1985, the Supreme Court disposed of Civil Appeal No. 8820 of 1983 and batch, directing the Government to consider the cases of all those who had completed three years or more of officiating service for absorption into these posts and promotion under Para 191 of the Police Officer Manual. The Court upheld the reversion of other Sub-Inspectors who had not completed three years of service. The appellant contended that he was temporarily promoted in February 1976 and continued in that post until he was reverted in May 1983. The respondent's contentions are not mentioned in the judgment text. The Court observed that if the appellant's case had been considered in light of the earlier direction, no further action would have been needed. If the Government did not consider his case because the appeal was pending, it was now for the Government to consider his case in accordance with rules for temporary promotion and confirmation in one of the 1300 supernumerary posts created by the Government. The Court accordingly disposed of the appeal without costs and directed the Government to consider the appellant's case and pass appropriate orders.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Absorption and Promotion - Temporary Sub-Inspector - Police Officer Manual, Para 191 - The appellant was temporarily promoted as Sub-Inspector in February 1976 and continued until reverted in May 1983. The Supreme Court had earlier directed on 19-04-1985 that those who officiated for three years or more by 30-09-1984 were to be considered for absorption into 1300 supernumerary posts. In the present appeal, the Court held that if the Government had not considered the appellant's case due to pending appeal, it must now consider his case for temporary promotion and confirmation in one of the supernumerary posts in accordance with rules (Para 1).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Government is bound to consider the appellant's case for absorption in one of the 1300 supernumerary posts in accordance with the rules for temporary promotion and confirmation, given the appellant's claim of temporary promotion since February 1976 and the earlier order of the Supreme Court dated 19-04-1985.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal disposed of. No costs. The Supreme Court directed the Government to consider the appellant's case in accordance with rules for temporary promotion and confirmation in one of the 1300 supernumerary posts created by the Government, if not already considered, and to pass appropriate order.

Law Points

  • Direction to consider cases for absorption in supernumerary posts
  • temporary promotion and confirmation under Police Officer Manual para 191
  • those who officiated for three years or more eligible for consideration
  • reversion of those with less than three years upheld
  • Government must consider case in accordance with rules
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

1997 LawText (SC) (02) 138

1997-02-20

K. Ramaswamy, S. Saghir Ahmad

Rana Pratap Singh

State of U.P. & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Service matter concerning absorption of temporary Sub-Inspector into supernumerary posts

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought consideration of his case for absorption in one of the 1300 supernumerary posts created by the Government, in light of Supreme Court's earlier direction dated 19-04-1985.

Filing Reason

The appellant's writ petition was dismissed by Allahabad High Court and his reversion was upheld; he claimed temporary promotion since February 1976 and continuous service till May 1983.

Previous Decisions

Allahabad High Court dismissed all writ petitions on 17-11-1983; Supreme Court on 19-04-1985 disposed of Civil Appeal No. 8820 of 1983 and batch directing consideration of cases of those who completed three years officiating by 30-09-1984, while upholding reversion of others.

Issues

Whether the appellant's case for absorption into supernumerary posts should be considered despite his reversion and the earlier order of the Supreme Court dated 19-04-1985. Whether the Government must now consider the appellant's case in accordance with rules for temporary promotion and confirmation.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant contended that he was temporarily promoted as Sub-Inspector in February 1976 and continued in that post until reverted in May 1983, thus entitled to be considered for absorption. Respondent's contentions are not mentioned in the judgment text.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court, following its earlier order dated 19-04-1985, held that cases of temporary Sub-Inspectors who had officiated for three years or more by 30-09-1984 should be considered for absorption into supernumerary posts, and those with less than three years were to be reverted. In the present case, the appellant claimed continuous temporary promotion from February 1976 to May 1983; therefore, the Government must consider his case in accordance with rules for temporary promotion and confirmation, if not already done.

Judgment Excerpts

This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment dated 17th November, 1983 of the judgment passed by the Allahabad High Court in W.P. No. 2869 of 1983 etc. This Court on 19th April, 1985 while disposing of the C.A. no. 8820 of 1983 and batch and directed the Government to consider the cases of all those persons who had completed three years or more in the light of the above direction for absorption in those supernumerary posts and promoted under para 191 of the Police Officer Manual. The appellant herein claims that he was promoted temporarily in February 1976 as a Sub-Inspector and was appointed on that premise and that he had been continuing in that post till he was reverted on May, 1983. If the Government did not consider his case since the appeal was pending, it is now for the Government to consider his case in accordance with rules for temporary promotion and confirmation in on of the 1300 supernumerary posts created by the Government by the aforesaid order dated 19th April 1985 passed by this Court, and to pass appropriate in that behalf.

Procedural History

The appellant filed Writ Petition No. 2880 of 1983 before the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), which dismissed all writ petitions on 17-11-1983. The appellant then filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court. Pending appeal, the Government by proceedings dated 01-12-1984 sanctioned creation of 1300 supernumerary posts of civil police in pay scale Rs 515-860, with condition that only those officiating Sub-Inspectors who had completed three years of officiating by 30-09-1984 would be absorbed. On 19-04-1985, the Supreme Court disposed of Civil Appeal No. 8820 of 1983 and batch, directing the Government to consider cases of those who had completed three years or more for absorption and to promote under Para 191 of the Police Officer Manual, while upholding reversion of those with less than three years. The present appeal was heard on 20-02-1997.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Quashes Mutation Orders in Favor of Daughter in Succession Dispute — Mutation Entries Do Not Confer Title and Must Be Based on Possession or Legal Right. The court held that revenue authorities must consider actual possessio...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Forest Land Encroachment Notices Under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code and Forest Act. Petitioners Failed to Establish Title or Authorisation for Construction on Government Forest Land.