IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2008 / 5TH ASHADHA 1930 OP.No. 26288 of 1999(D) ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. M.O.JOHNKUTTY, S/O. ONNUNNY, AGED 62 YEARS, RETIRED SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RESIDING AT MEENATHU VEEDU, THAZHAVA (NW).P.O., KUTHIRAPANTHI, KOLLAM. 2. R.RAGHUNATHAN PILLAI, S/O. RAGHAVAN PILLAI, AGED 62 YEARS, RETIRED SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RESIDING AT AMBADI HOUSE, ARCHAL, NEDIYARA.P.O., ANCHAL, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.RAJENDRAN NAIR (SR.) SRI.R.SREERAJ SRI.M.R.HARIRAJ SMT.REKHA VASUDEVAN SRI.SURAJ.S SMT.VINEETHA B. SRI.K.S.SARATH KUMAR SRI.S.NITHIN SRI.RAHEESH BABU RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, QUILON DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP NO.26288/1999 ORDER ON CMP NO.44358/1999 IN OP NO.26288/1999 DISMISSED. 26/06/2008 SD/- (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP 19661/1995 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P2 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A3/49849/99-Q-2 DATED 07/04/1999 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P3 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A3/49849/98-Q(3) DATED 07/04/1999 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT. P4 : COPY OF THE ORDER PROMOTING THE PETITIONERS AS SUB INSPECTORS NO.DGO Cr.60/99 DATED 08/07/1999 ISSUED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CB CID HQrs., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. P5 : COPY OF ORDER PROMOTING THE PETITIONERS AS SUB INSPECTORS TRO NO.50/99 DATED 21/07/1999 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RANGE. P6 : COPY OF THE LIST OF POLICE CONSTABLES ENLISTED IN THE DISTRICT ARMED RESERVE POLICE IN THE ORDER OF SENIORITY. P7 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A4-542/2002 DATED 09/01/2002. P8 : COPY OF REPLY DATED 16/01/2007 ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER. P9 : COPY OF THE FINALISED SENIORITY LIST OF SUB INSPECTORS OF POLICE AS ON 01/01/2003 FOR THE PRIOD FROM 01/01/1998 TO 31/12/2002. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS R1(a) : COPY OF ORDER NO.A5-10200/2003-TR DATED 08/01/2005 - PROVISIONAL SENIORITY LIST. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ------------------------- O.P. No. 26288 of 1999 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 26th day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are in this Court challenging the fixation of seniority in the cadre of Head Constables vide Ext.P5. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners were wrongly sent to Special Armed Police while juniors were retained in the District Armed Reserve Police. Consequent to this, those who were juniors to petitioners could join the local police earlier than the petitioners, which affected the petitioners' service prospects. However, this Court vide Ext.P1 judgment, accepted the grievance of the petitioners as genuine and, therefore, directed to grant relief to petitioners in regard to promotions. Consequent to Ext.P1 judgment, fresh seniority list in the cadre of local Police Constables and Head Constables were fixed. The petitioners also figure in the seniority list, originally issued to petitioners vide Ext.P3. The petitioners were assigned Rank Nos.42(a) and 43(a) in the cadre of Head Constables vide Ext.P3 order. However, it was later noticed that the promotion to Head Constables is made through test qualification and going by the dates on which petitioners passed the tests, seniority assigned to them vide Ext.P3 was incorrect. O.P. No. 26288/1999 -2- Consequently, Ext.P3 was corrected vide Ext.P5 by re-assigning petitioners' ranks in the seniority of Head Constables as 179B and 179C. It is now conceded that both the petitioners were later promoted as Assistant Sub Inspectors and retired in that cadre. The case of the petitioners is that they were entitled to retain seniority in the cadre of Head Constables as contained in Ext.P3 and the reversion of the same vide Ext.P5 is not justified. 2. I heard learned counsel appearing for petitioners and learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents. 3. The fact that petitioners were wrongly sent to the Special Armed Police after retaining the juniors to petitioners in the District Armed Reserve Police is found in Ext.P1 judgment. In fact, injustice was done to the petitioners because had they been sent to the local police earlier than those juniors to them, they would have been able to participate and pass the test for promotion to the Head Constable cadre earlier. However, the question to be considered is whether this Court can grant promotion to petitioners to the cadre of Head Constables notionally for their subsequent promotions. There is no provision in the Rules to dispense with the test qualification for promotion to the cadre of Head Constables. I do O.P. No. 26288/1999 -3- not think this Court can order that the promotion given to petitioners after passing the test should be retrospectively given. If relief prayed for is granted, then petitioners could get the promotion as Head Constables without passing the test, which is against the Rules. Therefore, the relief prayed for in the original petition cannot be granted, even though petitioners probably would have passed the test and become Head Constables earlier, if they were given the opportunity. In the circumstances, the original petition fails and is dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) jg