sat 1 wp 1463-2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1463 OF 2011 Shri Ashok Pandurang Sankpal ...Petitioner vs. Senior Inspector of Police, Azad Maidan Police Station, Mumbai & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Amit Sale i/b. Mr.Amit Shete for the Petitioner. Mrs.P.P. Shinde, APP for the State. CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & U.D. SALVI, JJ. JULY 8, 2011 P.C. :- 1 We have heard Mr.Sale, the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Mrs.Shinde, the learned APP appears for the State. 2 The petitioner came to be appointed as a Junior Audit Assistant with the Mumbai Municipal Corporation sometime in the year 1986 and he was promoted to the post of Senior Audit Assistant in sat 2 wp 1463-2011 June 1994. He was further promoted as Officer, Grade-2, with effect from 1st August, 2001 and finally, he came to be promoted to the post of Audit Officer, Grade-I with effect from 25th March, 2008. 3 The petitioner approached the Senior Inspector of Police, Azad Maidan Police Station by his complaint dated 28th August, 2010. We have perused the same and it is substantially about the grievance of the petitioner regarding his promotion to the higher post. He alleges that Shri P.C. Pisolkar has deliberately interpolated the confidential reports of the petitioner and thus, denied him the promotion. He further claims that he belongs to the Scheduled Caste and the said senior officer being a Brahmin has deliberately played with the CRs. The complainant, therefore, prays for registration of FIR against Shri Pisolkar for the offences punishable under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. sat 3 wp 1463-2011 4 We have given our anxious considerations to the complaint and in our view, it is a frivolous complaint. The petitioner has a departmental remedy to make a representation against the confidential reports, if he has been communicated any adverse reports, or challenge the adverse reports in appropriate proceedings either by way of an appeal as per the Service Rules or before the appropriate court. The petitioner’s complaint to the police station is nothing short of browbeating the senior officer and humiliate him. 5 Hence, the petition is dismissed and it is made clear that this order will not prevent him from submitting an appropriate representation against the adverse CRs. (U.D. SALVI, J) (B.H. MARLAPALLE, J)