New Delhi: The Supreme Court ruled in favour of a Telangana Police Head Constable, P Srinivas, who had been denied an accelerated promotion by the state government, after he pointed out that a fellow constable, who had faced a similar Naxalite attack on a police station and performed the same duties, was given the promotion but he was not.
P Srinivas and G Venkat Reddy, both Constables, and other police personnel who were stationed at Bommalaramaram police station in Yadadri Bhuvanagiri district had effectively repelled an attack by the activists of the outlawed Communist Party of India (Marxist, Leninist) on the police station on the night of January 30, 1999.
The government had issued orders for grant of accelerated promotion to the police personnel, with a view to improve the morale in the police force who had been involved in countering extremism/naxal activities.
Under that policy, Venkat Reddy got promoted, but despite multiple representations by Srinivas to avail the same, his requests were rejected, leaving the latter with no choice but to move the Telangana High Court seeking justice.
A single bench of the High Court rejected the submission of the state government’s counsel that grant of accelerated promotion was a discretionary power of the Director General of Police (DGP), which should not be ordinarily interfered with.
A division bench of the High Court had also affirmed the single bench’s order in favour of Srinivas, directing the state government to extend the benefit of accelerated promotion to the former as a Head Constable with effect from the date on which Venkat Reddy was promoted.
The state government had appealed against the High Court’s division bench order in the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court uploads order of HC division bench
The Supreme Court’s bench, comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and NV Anjaria, dismissed the Telangana government’s appeal on March 13, upholding the High Court’s earlier ruling.
“It is admitted during the course of argument today that the finding recorded by the Single Judge that the respondent (Srinivas) has fired more rounds than G Venkat Reddy (P.C. No.2058) is correct. If that be so, the High Court is entirely justified in interfering with the matter for the reason that the finding of the Committee that the respondent’s role in the incident was nominal is perverse,” the Supreme Court’s bench observed.
“When admittedly the respondent has fired more rounds and was instrumental in repelling the attack by the Naxalites in the police station, his role cannot be belittled for denial of accelerated promotion,” the bench ruled.
Dismissing the special leave petition filed by the state government, the top court ruled that it didn’t find any ground to interfere with the impugned order of the Telangana High Court.
Follow on Twitter | Posted by Vivek Bhoomi | | 
