In ‘strange case’, HC says police officials free to refuse promotion

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that no police personnel can be forced to climb the ladder of promotion against his will. Making it clear that advancement in rank was a matter of choice and not compulsion, the court also rejected the state’s insistence that Constables must accept elevation as Head Constables after observing that the authorities could not coerce unwilling officers to undergo the Lower School Course — the gateway to promotion — in the absence of specific rules.

The “strange case” was placed before Justice Jagmohan Bansal after Haryana police officials challenged the DGP’s August 4 order, including their names in List-B under the 35 per cent seniority-cum-fitness category for the 2022 Lower School Course.

The Bench was told that the petitioners, all over 35 years of age, were holding Constables’ rank. They approached the court submitting that they did not want to be promoted. Among other things, their counsel contended that selection for the Lower School Course under Rule 13.7 of the Punjab Police Rules — applicable to Haryana — was a step towards promotion as Head Constable.

Their counsel further submitted that they were not inclined to undergo the Lower School Course as they did not wish to hold the substantive rank of Head Constable. They were even ready to forego the Assured Career Progression Scheme and the financial or other benefits attached to the promotional post.

The state, on the other hand, opposed the plea, pointing to an acute shortage of Investigating Officers. It argued that investigations could not be carried out by Constables and only Head Constables were authorised to perform the role. The DGP, through a letter dated September 20, 2024, had clarified that Constables were duty-bound to accept promotion and undergo the course, it was added.

The court noted that promotion, by its very nature, was a recognition of merit and was never automatic. Referring to the rules, the Bench observed that a candidate seeking promotion had to meet several parameters, including passing physical and written tests during the Lower School Course. “These facts collectively prove that promotion is recognition and it is neither mechanical nor automatic,” the court asserted.

“It is a strange case where petitioners are denying promotion whereas respondent is compelling them to be promoted,” Justice Bansal stated, adding that the DGP’s letter could not override the absence of statutory provisions.

Allowing the pleas, Justice Bansal ruled: “Petitioners cannot be compelled to seek promotion. It is their prerogative. If they do not want promotion, the respondent cannot compel them to seek promotion unless and until specific Rules are framed.”