HC raps DGP for arbitrary out-of-turn promotions, directs compliance with Punjab Police Rules

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has admonished the State Director General of Police (DGP) for granting out-of-turn promotions to certain police officers in a “mechanical” and arbitrary manner, warning that such actions are creating resentment within the force. Justice Jagmohan Bansal made it clear that discretionary powers under the provisions of the Punjab Police Rules (PPR) were required be exercised reasonably, equitably, and with specific reasons recorded in each case.

“This court finds it appropriate to observe that the respondent has granted out-of-turn promotion to various officers, which is creating heart burning. The respondent should exercise power under Rule 13.21 of PPR in true spirit and considering the law laid down by this Court in multiple judgments. The power should not be exercised mechanically and specific reasons should be recorded prior to extending benefit to any officer”, Justice Bansal asserted.

Rule 13.21 empowers the DGP to relax any provision relating to promotion. The court asserted that the discretion allowed flexibility in granting out-of-turn promotions, but it was required not be applied arbitrarily or unreasonably. “Every discretionary power should be exercised in a reasonable and equitable manner,” Justice Bansal asserted, adding that promotions must reflect merit and the law laid down by the court in multiple precedents.

The Bench was assisted in the matter by counsel Manu K. Bhandari and Arjun Sawhni. The Bench, during the course of hearing, was told that the petitioner, recruited as a constable in 1989, sought out-of-turn promotion on account of his exemplary service. Over his career, he received 125 appreciation letters, yet his claim was rejected despite recommendations from the DSP, SSP, and DIG, and a prior direction from the High Court to consider his representation. Meanwhile, a junior officer with no comparable record of merit was promoted out-of-turn, prompting the petitioner to approach the court.

Justice Bansal clarified that the petitioner was not objecting to the junior officer’s promotion, but was seeking parity in recognition of his performance. “In the case of the respondent-officer, no reason has been recorded. The petitioner has not assailed said order, thus, there is no occasion to set aside order particularly after 14 years,” the court added.

The Bench observed the petitioner could not claim out of turn promotion as an “absolute, vested or fundamental right”. He also could not it on the ground that his junior had been granted the same. “The case of each officer is independently examined. This Court cannot ask or compel DGP to grant out of turn promotion to any officer. The petitioner has not pointed out any policy which creates right in his favour. As per policy of 2012, he is not eligible. Thus, this Court cannot issue mandamus to DGP to promote petitioner out-of-turn,” the Bench added.