IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12426 of 2008 KAUSHAL KISHORE YADAV, S/O SRI BRAHMDEO PRASAD YADAV, R/O VILLAGE-HRIDAY NAGAR, P.O.- DHARHARA, P.S.-BANMANKHI, DISTRICT-PURNEA, AT PRESENT POSTED AS CONSTABLE NO.3940, PATNA DISTRICT POLICE. …………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY-CUM-HOME COMMISSIONER, GOVT. OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL-CUM-INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3. THE ZONAL INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, DARBHANGA AT LAHERIASARAI. 4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KOSI RANGE, SAHARSA. 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE AT SAHARSA. 6. THE A.I.G. OF POLICE (PERSONNEL), BIHAR, PATNA. 7. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (ADMINISTRATION), BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. …………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 3 08.11.2011 Prayer of the petitioner made in paragraph 1 of the writ application is as follows:- “That this is an application for issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction/directions or order/orders, directing respondents to reconsider the case and claim of the petitioner for out of turn promotion to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector of police and also for granting all service consequential benefits retrospectively from the date the petitioner was found legally entitled to be promoted on the said post in the light of Rule 660C (out of turn) promotion of the Bihar Police Manual, 1978, volume-I 2 which has been defined as under :- out of turn promotion-selection Boards may recommend out of turn promotion to officers with outstanding records of service and competent authorities may order such promotion in deserving cases as they deem fit and proper with the approval of next higher authority. Officers so promoted should be placed below the officers of the approved existing list of respective rank prepared by Selection Boards and be confined against substantive vacancies as and when vacancies arise in the order of the list. Criteria taken together for determining outstanding records of service will be as follows:- (i) Award of President’s police medal and Indian Police Medal for gallanty and distinguished service. (ii) Should not have been awarded any major punishment till the date of consideration and order of out of turn promotion. (iii) Very good entries in permanent character roll. (iv) Litigation regarding high standard of investigation, detection and control of crime and intelligence work. (v) Should have ability for shouldering higher responsibilities consonant with the proposed promotion (see Home (Police) Department Notification No.G.S.R.34, dated 12th May, 1976). That the petitioner was although found qualified in the light of above essentials which he was possessing where given a complete go-bye in the impugned order dated 21.03.1997 passed 3 by the Departmental Promotion Committee in the light of Rule 660C of the Bihar Police Manual but the said Committee had directed to call for the opinion of the Zonal Inspector General of Police which is still awaited and the same has infringed the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 14, 16 and 19 of the Constitution of India. The appointment includes promotion under Article 16 of the Constitution of India and thus the petitioner’s case and claim are due to be considered afresh on the merit of the case and the impugned order dated 21.03.1997 is fit to be set aside because the said order in impugned has remained incomplete which is apparently evident from the perusal of the said impugned order.” The prayer shows that substantive prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is for his out of turn promotion as Sub-Inspector. The basis for such prayer is a recommendation made by the D.I.G., Darbhanga Range, as contained in his letter no. 379 dated 11.04.1994, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-5. Annexure- 2 shows that petitioner had moved this Court earlier with the same prayer through CWJC No. 4433 of 2000 which writ application was dismissed by this Court by order dated 07.07.2005. The observation of 4 this Court while rejecting the writ application of the petitioner was as follows:- “It appears from the materials on record that the petitioner has discharged the duty which was entrusted to him. The discharge of the duty sincerely cannot be a ground for out of turn promotion and as such, I do not find any merit in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed.” Thus, it is apparent that the petitioner’s writ application for the same prayer has already been dismissed by this Court on merits earlier. Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on an order of Ranchi Bench of this Court, a copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-3. The said order was apparently passed in a contempt application. The observations of the Court in paragraph 7 were clearly against any grant of out of turn promotion only on the basis of performance of duties of a police personnel implementing crime and catching criminals. For easy reference paragraph 7 of the order is reproduced hereinbelow:- 5 “It may be pointed out that grant of out of turn promotion is always at the cost of others, who, if such promotion were not granted, would have been promoted to the post in the ordinary course. The provisions regarding out of turn promotion ought, therefore, in my opinion, to be very strictly construed. It is unfortunate that the provisions of Rule 660C are being liberally exercised and such promotions have been inserted in many undeserving cases. It is the duty of the police to prevent crime and catch the criminals. Every such case cannot be regarded as an act of gallantry for which the person concerned should be rewarded with out of turn promotion at the cost of others.” In the circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in the writ application, besides the application being not maintainable as having been preferred for the same relief before this Court afresh after dismissal of his first writ application on merits. The writ application is dismissed. Arvind/ ( J.N. Singh, J.)