AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 227 wordsJagmohan Bansal, J
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 27.09.2016, (Annexure P-18), whereby his claim for regular promotion as Sub-Inspector w.e.f. 07.02.1979 was rejected.
The petitioner was promoted as Sub-Inspector in 1979 on ad hoc basis. As per applicable rules, out of turn promotion cannot be more than 10% of sanctioned strength. The petitioner belonged to Sports Quota and under Sports Quota promotion cannot be beyond 5% of sanctioned strength. The State Government in terms of judgments of this Court as well as Hon’ble Supreme Court framed policies with respect to regularization of ad hoc promotions. The petitioner was extended benefit as per said policies.
Learned State counsel submits that ad hoc promotion of the petitioner was considered as per policies which were framed in terms of orders passed by this Court as well as Hon’ble Supreme Court. The petitioner was given due benefit.
There was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on 10.07.2023 and even today, there is no representation on behalf of petitioner.
Dismissed with liberty to petitioner to move an appropriate application within six months from today, if cause survives.
Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the petitioner.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.