The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that seniority for promotion to the post of Sub Inspector (S.I.) must be determined from the date of promotion to the feeder category (Head Constable/Assistant Sub Inspector) and not from the date of initial appointment as a Police Constable.

The Single Bench of Justice Subba Reddy Satti observed, "The common integrated list of Head Constables/ASIs (civil) as of 01.11.2024 was prepared. In the said list, the senior most HCs/ASIs 70 persons called for to attend the Departmental Qualifying Examination vide Radio Message in C.No.1142/A1/2024 dated 06.11.2024 and those employees did not challenge the seniority list. As per the seniority list, the most junior called from Prakasam District in the probable list was enlisted as PC (civil) in the year 1992 and promoted as HC (civil) on 09.06.2012. The most junior called from Nellore District in the probable list was enlisted as PC (civil) in the year 1989 and promoted to HC (civil) on 22.06.2012. The most senior among the petitioners was enlisted as PC in the year 1989 and promoted as HC (civil) on 22.06.2012."

"Thus, the above discussion makes the thing more than discernable that the respondent authority adhered to Rules 2 and 15 of the Rules. Even in the integrated provisional seniority list of HCs/ASIs impugned in the writ petition, some of the Head Constables of Nellore District, though enlisted as Police Constables on 09.06.1989, promoted as Head Constables on 05.09.2011, were also considered. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, since the respondent authority adhered to the Rules and issued Radio/Fax Message vide C.No.1142/A1/2024 dated 06.11.2024, this Court does not find any merit in these writ petitions and the same are liable to be dismissed," the Bench added.

Background of case

The petitioners, serving as Head Constables (HC) and Assistant Sub Inspectors (ASIs) in SPSR Nellore District, were originally appointed as Police Constables (Civil) in 1989 under the office of the Superintendent of Police, Nellore. They were promoted to Head Constable on June 22, 2012 and were awaiting further promotion to Sub Inspector of Police.

However, the respondent issued a Fax/Radio Message directing the selection of 58 ASIs/WASIs for a Pre-Promotional Training Course, a prerequisite for promotion to Sub Inspector. The petitioners were overlooked despite being senior in service since 1989, while junior officers, appointed as Police Constables in 1992, were identified for promotion.

Aggrieved by this selection, the petitioners filed writ petitions, arguing that:

1. The selection process was conducted without preparing a provisional seniority list or calling for objections, violating Rule 34 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996.

2. The seniority of an officer should be determined by the date of first appointment to the class, meaning their seniority should be counted from 1989, whereas the selected candidates were appointed in 1992.

3. The respondent's decision was arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to Rule 15(a) of the Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service Rules (APPSS).

Arguments by the Respondent

The respondent countered that:

1. A Departmental Qualifying Examination is a mandatory requirement for undergoing pre-promotional training for S.I. selection.

2. Seniority is not determined by the date of enlistment as a Police Constable but rather by the date of promotion to Head Constable/ASI.

3. Though the petitioners were appointed as Police Constables in 1989, the selected candidates had been promoted to Head Constable before them, making them senior in the feeder category.

Court's Findings and Ruling

The High Court dismissed the petition, ruling that:

1. Rule 15(a) of the APPSS Rules establishes that seniority is determined by the date of first appointment to a specific class or category. Since Head Constable/ASI is the feeder category for S.I., seniority must be counted from the date of promotion to Head Constable, not from the initial appointment as Constable.

2. The court relied on Ganga Vishan Gujrati Vs. State of Rajasthan, where the Supreme Court held that seniority within a grade is counted from the date of entry into that grade.

3. The court also cited State of Bihar Vs. Akhouri Sachindra Nath, where the Supreme Court ruled that retrospective seniority cannot be granted from a date when an employee was not yet part of the cadre.

4. Since the selected candidates were promoted to Head Constable before the petitioners, their seniority was rightly determined based on promotion within the feeder category.

Verdict

The Court upheld the respondent’s decision, ruling that the Department had followed Rules 2 and 15 of the APPSS Rules correctly. Concluding that no illegality or arbitrariness was found in the selection process, the writ petitions were dismissed.

Cause Title: T. Venkateswarlu and Others v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others [Neutral Citation No. APHC010524092024]

Click here to read/download the Order


Justice Subba Reddy Satti

Sukriti Mishra

Legal Correspondent

Sukriti Mishra is a Legal Correspondent at Verdictum. She extensively covers the Supreme Court. She has completed her graduation with BA. LL.B (Hons.) from The ICFAI University, Dehradun. Sukriti started covering courts in March 2022, she has previously worked with another legal news portal, where she extensively covered the Delhi High Court and Trial Courts.