CWP No.7880 of 2009.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.7880 of 2009 Date of Decision: 24.05.2010 **** Rajesh Kumar . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab and others . . . . . 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. Manu K. Bhandari, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. B.S. Chahal, DAG Punjab ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The CWPs No. 6716, 7880, 7939, 7944, 7953, 7954, 7958, 7970, 7976, 7985, 8000, 8149, 8279, 8994, 9165, 9168, 9628, 9883, 9901, 10406 & 10445 of 2009; 4371 of 2010 preferred by the ASIs of the Punjab Police are being taken up and disposed of together by this common order as they involve common issues for adjudication. For the sake of brevity, the facts are being extracted from CWP No.7880 of 2009. (2). The petitioner, who is holding the local rank of ASIs in the respondent-Police Department, seeks quashing of the order dated 30.04.2009 (Annexure P6) passed by CWP No.7880 of 2009.doc - 2 – the Director General of Police, Punjab, whereby, the local rank of ASI granted to him, has been ordered to be withdrawn. (3). Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto the respondents have filed their counter-affidavit. (4). During the course of hearing, it transpires that the claim of petitioner needs to be examined by the Department in accordance with Rule 13.2(a) of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, in terms whereof the local rank is conferred. Similarly, the administrative implications and/or the consequences in cadre management arising therefrom also need to be examined. (5). This court vide order dated 04.03.2010 passed in CWP No.566 of 2010 titled as Ranjit Singh and Others vs. State of Punjab and others, has constituted an Officers’ Committee comprising two Senior Police Officers duly assisted by an Additional Advocate General, Punjab to look into the grievances of the Police personnel. The parameters, within which the said Committee is obligated to perform its duties, have also been descripted. Needless to say that the Committee, uninfluenced of the previous administrative decision(s) even if taken by a superior authority, shall be required to act in a transparent, fair CWP No.7880 of 2009.doc - 3 – and judicious manner as is expected of a quasi-judicial authority. (6). The writ petition(s) is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the Officers’ Committee constituted in Ranjit Singh’s case (supra) to consider the claim of the petitioner(s) for the grant of local rank of ASI under Rule 13.2(a) of the Rules ibid read with the standing orders/policies/instructions, if any, issued on the subject. The Officers’ Committee shall take a decision in the matter within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Needless to say that if the Committee finds the petitioner(s) entitled for the grant of local rank under the Rules, the competent authority is directed to implement such recommendations forthwith unless it disagrees with the same for the reasons to be assigned and conveyed in writing. (7). It is further directed that till the Committee takes an appropriate decision, the petitioner shall be allowed to hold the local rank of ASI already granted to him. In case an adverse decision is taken, the same shall not be given effect for a period of one month to enable the petitioner(s) to seek redressal of his/their grievances before an appropriate forum. (8). Ordered accordingly. CWP No.7880 of 2009.doc - 4 – (9). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 24.05.2010 vishal shonkar