Court No. - 29
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 25 of 2019 Appellant :- Shukvir Singh @ Shukhvir Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Shri Krishna Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
Heard Sri S.K. Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioners/appellants, learned Standing Counsel and perused the material on record.
The petitioners/appellants claimed out of turn promotion. Their claim was rejected by the Director General of Police, U.P. D.G.P Headquarters, Lucknow vide order 21.12.2013. The writ petition of the petitioners/appellants against the aforesaid order has been dismissed vide order dated 7.12.2018 by the writ Court. The petitioners/appellants in challenging the order of the learned Single Judge contends that their case for out of turn promotion was never placed before the Committee constituted for the purpose and as such they could not have been ignored for out of turn promotion.
The learned Single Judge in his order has clearly mentioned that the committee upon examination of the F.I.R., injury Report and other supporting and relevant documents concluded that the petitioners were not entitled for grant of out of turn promotions. The committee on the basis of such material had opined that the petitioners did not make an effective contribution or play an exceptional role in the operation.
The order of the Director General of Police also reveals that the case of the petitioners was considered by the committee and, on the basis of the report of the committee, he is also satisfied that in the operation dated 17.3.2010 which took place in District Mathura in relation to the encounter of Rafeeq Urf Rahul, the role of the petitioners-appellants was not such that they should be granted out of turn promotion and as such he agrees with the report of the committee.
The above facts are clear enough to demonstrate that the matter of out of turn promotion of the petitioners/appellants was placed and considered by the committee. The argument to the contrary is completely misconceived and devoid of merit.
This apart the order of the Director General of Police dated 12.12.2013 record as under:-
"i=koyh ij miyC/k vfHkys[kksa esa mDr nksuksa dfeZ;ksa dh eqBHksM+ ds nkSjku dksbZ fof'k"V Hkwfedk ugha jgh gS cfYd iz'uxr eqBHksM+ esa vkj{kh 23 uk0iq0 vjfoUn izrki flag ,oa vkj{kh 1191 uk0iq0 lq[kohj flag mQZ lqdohj flag }kjk iznf'kZr d`R; O;fDrxr :i ls vnE; lkgl ,oa 'kkS;Z dh Js.kh esa u gksrs gq, muds lkekU; O;olkf;d nkf;Roksa ds fuoZgu ds varxZr jgs gSa] tks fc"k;xr 'kklukns'k fnukad 3-2-1994 esa fufgr izkfo/kkuksa ls vkPNkfnr ugh gksrs gSaA"
In view of the above specific findings, we are of the view that the petitioners/appellants fails to make out a case for interference in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction. Accordingly, if the Single Judge has dismissed the petition, there is no miscarriage of justice so as to warrant any interference in this appeal. The appeal lacks of merits and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 21.1.2019 S. Singh