HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.7075 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 10.08.2011 **** Sub Inspector Sanjeev Kumar & Anr. . . . . Petitioners VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. APS Shergill, Advocate; Mr. Saqib Ali Khan, Advocate; Mr. Gurminder Singh, Advocate; Mr. NK Banka, Advocate, for the petitioners Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG Punjab ***** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). This order shall dispose of CWP Nos.7075 & 12109 of 2011; 11993, 16724, 16845 & 17799 of 2010 involving inter-se-seniority dispute raised by the Police personnel(s) of the State of Punjab. (2). The Inspectors of Punjab Police belonging to different cadres had earlier also raised this dispute which was entrusted by this Court to an Officers’ Committee constituted vide order dated 04.03.2010 passed in CWP No.566 of 2010 (Ranjit Singh & Ors. v. State of CWP No.7075 of 2011 APS Shergill police matter.doc - 2 – Punjab & Ors.), the operative part whereof reads as follows:- “In view of the above-stated stand taken by the parties and the issues raised, without going into the merits of the controversies at this stage, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- i. there shall be an Officer’s Committee comprising (i) Sh. Parag Jain, IPS, IGP/Head Quarters, Punjab Police (ii) Smt. Gurpreet Kaur Deo, IPS, DIG Administration, Punjab Police Headquarters and (iii) Sh. MS Gill, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, Attached with DGP, who shall consider the claims of the petitioners and other police personnel who are likely to be affect. ii. The Committee shall hear the petitioners and all the police personnel who are likely to be affected by the recommendations that may be made by it. The Committee, after examining the rival claims in the light of the Act, Rules, Government Policy, equitable considerations, fair and just principles, shall submit its recommendations to the Director General of Police, Punjab/State Government, as early as possible and preferably within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is received. iii. The petitioners and other notices shall be at liberty to submit additional documents and/or plea(s) as may be required. CWP No.7075 of 2011 APS Shergill police matter.doc - 3 – iv. The Committee shall submit its recommendations duly supported with reasons. v. the recommendations of the Committee shall ordinarily be accepted by the Director General of Police/State Government as the case may be unless there are strong and cogent reasons to be recorded in writing. vi. If the petitioners are aggrieved at the Committee’s report/recommendations, they shall be at liberty to challenge the same in accordance with law. vii. Till the Officers’ Committee resolves the issues, the allocation to different cadres, promotions and/or any other incidental service events shall be subject to the Committee’s report and the final decision to be taken thereupon by the competent authority.” (3). It appears that the Committee constituted in Ranjit Singh’s case (supra) was rendered temporarily defunct due to transfer of one or two of its members which prompted some of the affected police officials to approach this Court by way of CWP No.11993 of 2010 wherein the official respondents were vide order dated 20.08.2010 directed not to effect any promotions until the Committee constituted in Ranjit Singh’s case (supra) considers the issue. The respondents’ request for vacation of the afore- CWP No.7075 of 2011 APS Shergill police matter.doc - 4 – stated stay order was also declined vide a subsequent order dated 13.10.2010. (4). This Court thereafter heard the parties in the above- stated case(s) and on 11.05.2011 issued the following directions:- “……..In view of the above circumstances, the respondents are directed to finalise the seniority list within a period of four weeks. No promotion shall be made till the seniority list is finalized. However, on finalization of the seniority list, respondents shall be at liberty to make promotions in accordance with law. However, any such promotion shall remain subject to outcome of all these writ petitions and without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners or any other person who may be effected by the order. Needless to say that any person aggrieved of the final seniority list or any promotion that may be made, shall have the liberty to seek appropriate remedy available under law.” (5). Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, learned DAG Punjab, on instructions from Gurtej Singh, Superintendent, Litigation Branch, CPO states that in deference to the above-reproduced directions, the final seniority list has been issued on 07.06.2011 and displayed on the Department’s official website also. She further states that promotions have also been effected as per the said CWP No.7075 of 2011 APS Shergill police matter.doc - 5 – final seniority list in terms of the permission granted by this Court. (6). Learned counsel for the petitioners however points out that some of the promotees are beneficiaries of the previous disputed seniority list though they would not be entitled to such promotion(s) as per the final seniority list dated 07.06.2011. According to him, should the promotions granted to such Police personnel(s) prior to 07.06.2011 are reviewed, it would come to fore that they rank junior to the petitioners in the final seniority list dated 07.06.2011 from the date(s) of their appointment as ASIs and cannot hold the promotional posts to the detriment of the petitioners (senior persons). (7). Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that since the task assigned to the Officers’ Committee is over and the final seniority list has been issued, these writ petitions are rendered infructuous in a way. However, owing to the fresh issues raised on behalf of the petitioners are yet to be settled, I deem it appropriate to dispose of these writ petitions with the following directions:- (i) The respondent-Authorities are directed to review the promotions granted prior to finalization of the seniority list dated 07.06.2011 and those police CWP No.7075 of 2011 APS Shergill police matter.doc - 6 – personnel(s) who are found to be not entitled to hold such promotional rank(s) as per the final seniority list 07.06.2011, be reverted to the rank to which he/they is/are entitled to, by following the principles of natural justice; (ii) The Police personnel who are now entitled to be promoted retrospectively or otherwise as per the final seniority list dated 07.06.2011, be considered for such promotions as early as possible and the due benefits be granted to them in a time bound manner; (iii) These directions shall not be construed as a ‘seal of approval’ of the final seniority list dated 07.06.2011. The aggrieved persons shall be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for the review/modification/setting aside of the said final seniority list in accordance with law. (8). The directions issued at (i)&(ii) above, shall be complied with within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (9). Further promotions, if any, shall also be subject to the directions issued hereinabove. (10). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 10.08.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge CWP No.7075 of 2011 APS Shergill police matter.doc - 7 –