9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Criterion for selection of Sub-Inspectors for promotion to Inspectors. 2. Applicability of the Uttar Pradesh Government Services Criteria for Recruitment by Promotion Rules, 1994 to police personnel. 3. Validity of the selection/select list in light of the above issues. Summary: Issue 1: Criterion for Selection The core question before the Court was whether the selection of Sub-Inspectors for promotion to Inspectors should be based on the specific police-related order of 5th November 1965 or the seniority-based criteria under the General UP Government Service (Criteria for Recruitment by Promotion) Rules, 1994 framed under Article 309 of the Constitution. The Court noted that the impugned selection was effected in terms of the Government Order dated 5th November 1965, which emphasized selection on merit arranged in order of seniority. The Court found that the 1965 Government Order, framed under Section 2 of the Police Act, 1861, had statutory backing and was not overridden by the 1994 Rules. Issue 2: Applicability of 1994 Rules The Court examined whether the 1994 Rules applied to police personnel. It was argued that the 1994 Rules, framed under Article 309, did not apply to the police force, which was governed by the Police Act, 1861. The Court agreed, noting that the Police Act provided a complete code for the police force, including provisions for appointments and promotions. The Court emphasized that unless the General Rule specifically repealed the special rules, the latter would prevail. The Court also noted that the 1994 Rules were prospective and could not affect the selection process that commenced in 1993. Issue 3: Validity of the Selection/Select List The Court addressed the validity of the selection/select list, which was challenged on the grounds that the 1994 Rules were not followed, and the selection committee failed to prepare a list for each year. The Court found that the selection process was conducted under the 1965 Government Order, which was valid and applicable. The Court also noted that the candidates participated in the selection process without protest, invoking the doctrine of estoppel by conduct. The Court concluded that the selection process was not void but any irregularities were curable. Conclusion: The Court set aside the judgments of the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench, allowing the appeals. The Court held that the 1965 Government Order governed the selection process, and the 1994 Rules did not apply to the police personnel. The selection/select list was valid, and any irregularities were curable. The appeals were allowed with no costs.
|
