IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 605 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 27, 2010 Union of India and others …Appellants Versus Sukhwinder Singh …Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present: Mr. Sukhdeep Singh Sandhu, Central Govt. Standing Counsel, for the appellants. Mr. Rajiv Anand, Advocate, for the respondent. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. The instant appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 4.11.2009, passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 8393 of 2009, allowing the writ petition filed by the petitioner-respondent. 2. The petitioner-respondent has approached this Court by filing the aforesaid petition with a prayer for issuance of direction to allow him to undergo Section Commander Course, which is a promotional course for promotion of Constable to the rank of Head Constable, enabling him to attain eligibility for promotion to the rank of Head Constable (General Duty) in LPA No. 605 of 2010 (O&M) consonance with the instructions and guidelines issued by the respondent- appellant department. A further prayer was made for directing the respondents-appellants to grant him due seniority for consideration for promotion to the rank of Head Constable (General Duty) on successful completion of promotion cadre over and above his juniors. 3. Learned Single Judge has noticed that the petitioner-respondent was falling in zone of consideration for being detailed for promotional course in June 2008 and his name figured at Sr. No. 41A of Section Commander Course. However, the petitioner-respondent was not detailed for the said course on the excuse that he has been down graded being low medical category. The aforesaid fact is evident from letter dated 19.3.2008 (P-4). Learned Single Judge considered para 2 and 9(d) of the Standing Order 7, which deals with rehabilitation of force personnel. He has also taken into account the supplementary instructions dated 8.5.2002, issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs (P-11) and has concluded that the personnel of the force who is placed in low medical category ‘A2’ is also suitable for promotion but on his assessment by the Board Staff. There is no condition either in the Standing Order or in the instructions dated 8.5.2002 (P-11) issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs that a personnel in low medical category was not to be detailed for promotional course. Accordingly, the writ petition has been allowed with direction to the respondent-appellants to detail the petitioner-respondent to undergo Section Commander Course and after successful completion of the course he is to be considered for promotion in accordance with law along with grant of seniority in his batch. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants has referred to various Signals, 2 LPA No. 605 of 2010 (O&M) which is in para 7 of the grounds of appeal and has sought to argue that the persons with low medical category are not to be detailed for pre-promotional and promotional courses. However, we are unable to agree with the submissions made because the learned Single Judge on the basis of the Standing Order as well as the instructions issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs has reached a positive conclusion that a personnel of the force who is placed in low medical category ‘A2’ is also suitable for promotion but on his reassessment by the Board Staff. It has also been found that neither in the Standing Order nor in the instructions issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, there is a provision that a person with low medical category is not to be detailed for promotional course or pre-promotional course. Therefore, the Signals to which reference has been made, would not be of any relevance, especially when reliance has been placed on the Standing Order as well as the instructions issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs. Accordingly we find that there is no merit in the instant appeal warranting admission. 5. For the reasons aforementioned, this appeal fails and the same is dismissed. 6. In view of the fact that the appeal has been dismissed on merits, no orders are required to be passed on the miscellaneous applications filed along with the appeal including application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (A.N. JINDAL) 3 LPA No. 605 of 2010 (O&M) July 27, 2010 JUDGE Pkapoor 4