Moose Bin lbrahim v. 1. The Principal Secretary

the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to sanction the pension as per the scale of the commandanU SP (Non cadre) and other benefits eligible to that post /cadre and release the same, on par with my juniors, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counselfor the Petitioner: SRI MD. MURTUZAALI FARUQUI Counsel for the Respondents : AGP FOR SERVICES (HOME) The Court made the following ORDER THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA ORDERl Heard Sri MD Murtuza Ali Faruqui, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learnerl Assistant Government pleader for services (Home) appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. praver as under: "...to direct the respondents herein to inrplement the GO Ms No.14 dt.Z6-2-2OLg to Nr>tionally promote this petitioner as Sp (Non cadre) w th all pensionary and other benefits eligible to the p<lst of SP (Non cadre), by setting aside the Memo N,:.3693 dt 9-1-2020 served on me on 2L-7-2020 and dt:clare it as illegal arbitrary unfair unjust and against the principles of natural justice and pass...,, 3 i) -l-he petitioner was initially appointed as Reserve sub- Inspector in the SAR CpL, Amberpet, Hyderabad, on \ \ H ') SNrJ W.P.No.15664 of 2O2O

11.05.1981, and retired on 28'022018 as Additional SuperintendentofPolice/Commandantafter36yearsof unblemished service' The petitioner was Promoted as from 19BB), as Reserve Inspector in 1991 (notionally Deputy Superintendent of Police (AR) Additional Commandant in 2010' in 2001, and as ii) The Government issued G'O' Ms' No' BB' Home (Ser.I) Department, dated 01'04'2013' creating promotional Reserve bY treating the Post of avenues in the Armed Guards) as equivalent to Commandant (Home Superintendent of Police (Non-Cadre)' During the bifurcation oftheState,thepetitionerwasallottedtoTelanganaand postedasAddl.SPatTSPA.Beingseniorandfullyqualified, thepetitionerwasentitledtopromotionasSP(Non-Cadre) on par with his juniors' iii)BasedontheDGP'srecommendation'theGovernment issued G.O. Ms. No' L4, dated 26'02'20L8' creating a supernumerary post of SP (Non-Cadre) to accommodate the petitioner. However, the said G'O' was not implemented J SN,J W.P.No.15664 of 2O2O before the petitioner's retirement on 28.o2.zoL}. Later, througr Memo No. 3639 dated 09.01 .2020, the Government refuserl to implement the G.o. Ms. No. 14, dated 26.02.2018 without assigning valid reasons. Aggrieved by the sarne, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. ITERUSED THE RECORp:

4. A) "The attention of the Director Generar of porice, Telangana, Hyderabad is invited to the references cited. He is informed that the representation of Sri Moosa Bin Ibrahim, Asst. Director. Addl. Sp (AR) (Retd) for promotion as commandant Equivalent to sp (NC) in SARCPL, Amberpet is examined and is not 'to feasible for consideration. The DGp is requesteo inform the same to the individual.,t . \ \ I I 4 SN,J W.P.No.15664 of 2O2O hereunder: *7) In the meantime, Government considered this office proposal made in the year 2011 to improve the promotionat opport'nity to the AR personnel and issued G.O.Ms.No. 88 H;;e (ier'1) Department' dt'1'4'2013' as an amendment to C.b.f tg, Ot, 16.6.t997, inserting the post of Addl' ipt (AR) between DSP and existing Commandant ff ome Guards' thereby treating the Commandants potti equivalent to SP(NC) and as promotional post't-o aaar' bp (nn)' But the orders issued in the G.O. 88, dt' l'4'2OL3 was not implemented till bifurcation of the state' 8) During bifurcation of the state' out of 4 commandants all;tted to AR, 2 posts each were allotted to Telangana uno nnania- pradesl-r, whereas the single post urfoit"ld to SARCPL at Kurnool was allotted to A'P' 9) The applicant, Sri Moosa Bin Ibrahim was recruited in SARCPL as nSi ttt 11'5'1981 and promoted as Ri in 19gg, as Dsp in looo and as commandant (equivarent to Addl.SP as per pt":t*ii"d rules) in the year 2010' On his promotion as CommanAant' SARCPL he was posted to Kurnool which *;;;;;"rked to SARCPL' However' during bifurcation of tne state' the post was allotted to A'P' whereas he was urroit"Jlo TS, hence he was repatriated to Telangana unO nJ* *orking in the cadre of AddI'SP' 1/' ) SNrJ W.P.No.15664 ot 2O2O I0) As stated above, the amendment issued in G.O.vls.No.88, dt.1.4.2013 treating the Commandant, Home Guards as sp (NC) post is confined to Armed Reserve and hence, two senior most Addl. Sps (AR) belorrging to 1985 batch were proposed for promotion as commandant Home Guards against the 2 posts allotted to Telarrgana and Government approved their inclusion in the panerl vide G.O.Ms.No.91, dt.3/B/2otl. of " Home (Ser_1) Depl.. 11) The applicant belong to 1981 batch and is the senior most Addl.sp and senior to period of 7 years. However, despite having 7 years of experience as conrmandant, he courd not be considered for promotion though deserves for the same, in the absence of posts and in the absence of incrusion of sARCpL in G.o. gg, dt. 1.4.2013. 12) The case of the appricant deserves favourabre consideration for the following reasons:

1. He was appointed as RSI is in the year 19g1 and completed 36 years of service.

2. He is senior most among all serving AR personnel.

3. Two Addt.Sp (AR) of 1985 batch RSIs were already considered for promotion as commandants against two earmarked promotional posts of Commandant, Home Guards, Hyderabad City and Commandant, Home Guards, Telangana.

4. There are no promotional avenues in SARCPL since two posts of commmandant Home Guards was allotted to Armed Reserve.

5. He has already put up 7 years of service as Commandant, Home Guards, Kurnool. \ I 6 SN,' W.P.No.15664 of 2020

6. The applicant is due to retire from service on

28.2.2A18.

7. If considered he will retire from service Commandant, instead of Addl'Commandant' AS B. No other individual promotion' will be effected bY his

9. Except one increment in the promotionalpost' no additional finanliit burden on the Government' a special 13) In view of the above' it is requested to consider the case of sri wrossa gin luianil ^as ^t:.::.^und of-lgmmandant equivalent to create a supernu;t;;';y sp (Nc) post in th;;;"i";tRs'56870-10s810 in SARGPL to '"-tt accommodate tn" commandant (NCi, ;[i'PL The iupernumerarv 'post created shall cea# to function on the date of his retirement .. .rpl-nnuation i'e'' on 28'2'2018' tppficant-.duty promotin-g-" lt* " 14) Earty orders are requested in the matter'" DISCUSSION AND CONCOLUSION : 5 contends that, in

24.08.2017 issued Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner of the clear Proceedings dated the Director General of Police' Hyderabad, addressed to the PrinciPat Telangana State, Secretary to Government' Home (Services-I)' Hyderabad (referred to and extracted above)' it was requested to consider the case of the petitioner as a special case and to 7 SNrJ W.P.No.15664 of 2O2O create a supernumerary post of commandant, equivalent to the post of Superintendent of police (Non-cadre), in the pay scale of Rs.56,870-1,05,810 in sARCpL, to accommodate the pr:titioner by duly promoting the petitioner as commandant (Non-cadre), sARCpL. It was further stipulal:ed that the said post so created would cease to exist on the date of petitioner's retirement on superannuation, i.e., orr 28.02.2018. However, despite the said proceedings dated 24.08.2017 containing specific directions in favour of the pe:titioner, the same were not implemented, and the petitioner retired from service on 28.02.2018. The petitioner, submitted detailed representations dated 20.07,2017 and 24.o9.20t9 to respondent No.1 seeking implernentation of the said proceedings and consequential benefits, but no action has been taken by the respondents on thr: said representations till date.

6. A bare perusal of the record, particularly the proceedings in R.C. No 1197 /c3120t5, dated 20.LL.z}tg, of the Director General of police, Telangana State, Hyde't-abad, addressed to the principar secretary, Home \ I 8 SNrJ W.P.No.15664 of 2O2O (Ser.I), Government of Telangana, Hyderabad' indicates thatspecificdirectionsWereissuedontherepresentation dated 24.09.2019 for promotion to the post of Commandant, equivalent to the post of Superintendent of Police (Non-Cadre) in SARCPL, Amberpet' only for the purposeofreleasingtheConsequentialpensionarybenefits legallyduetothepetitioner.Thesaidproceedingsclearly refer to the recommendations addressed to respondent No'1 vide proceedings dated 24'OB'20L7, seeking consideration ofthepetitioner,ScaseasaSpecialcaseandforthecreation of a supernumerary post of Commandant' equivalent to the post of Superintendent of Police (Non-Cadre), in the pay scale of Rs. 56,870-1,05,810 in SARCPL' to accommodate thepetitionerbydulypromotinghimasCommandant(Non- Cadre),SARCPL,andtocontinuethesaidsupernumerary postuntilhisretirementonSuperannuation,i.€.,till 28.02.2018. However, the said directions were not implemented. Thereafter, the petitioner superannuated on 28,02.2018. Therefore, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that, in view of the clear letter dated 20.lL2019 of respondent No'2 addressed to 9 SNrl W.P.No.15664 ot 2O2O respor dent No. 1 in response to the petitaoner,s representation dated 24.09.2019, the petitioner is entifled to the relief as prayed for in the present writ petition.

7. ,A bare perusal of the record clearly indicates that the petitioner's case was favorably recommended vide procer:dings dated 20.11 .20t9 of respondent No.2, addre:;sed to respondent No.1, for creation of a supenlumerary post of commandant, equivalent to the post of sullerintendent of police (Non-cadre), in the pay scale of Rs. 5;6,870- 1,05,81_0 in SARCPL, to accommodate the petitioner by duly promoting him as commandant (Non- cadre,), SARCPL, and to continue the said supernumerary post until his retirement on superannuation, i.€., 28.02..2018, which admittedly had not been implemented.

8. The record also indicates that the petitioner had submitted representations dated 20.07.20t7 and 24.09.20L9 seeking implementation of the Government orders issued vide G.o.Ms. No. 14 dated 26.02.2018 and requr:sting the issuance of appropriate proceedings to \ -? I 10 SN,J W.P.No.15664 ol2O2O implement the recommendations made by respondent No'2 to respondent No'1 vide proceedings dated 24'O8'20L7' However, the same had not been acted upon until the proceedings dated 20'lL'Z}tg' wherein r:espondent No'2 againrequestedrespondentNo.ltoconsiderthepetitioner,s present request for implementation of G'O'Ms' No' 14 dated

26.oz.zot8andtoreleaseallconsequentialbenefitstothe petitioner,inaccordancetothespecificobservationsmade in the letter dated 24'OB'2OL7 of respondent No'2 addressed to resPondent No'1'

9. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the writ petition may be disposed of by directing respondent No'1 to consider the grievance of the petitioner, as put forth in the petitioner's representation dated 24'Og 'z}tg ' duly taking into account the letter dated 24'O8'2Ot7 of respondent No.2 addressed to respondent No'1' as well as the proceedings dated 20'11'2O19 of respondent No'2 i i I ! i SNrJ W.P.No.15664 ol 2O2O addressed to respondent No.1, in accordance to law, withirr a reasonable period.

10. r'he learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner does not dispute the said submission made by the learned Assistant Government pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.

11. a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, b) The submissions made by the rearned counser appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government pteader for Services (Home), appe;aring on behalf of the respondents, c) The contents of the proceedings vide retter No.R'c.67tlcs/zoL7 dated 24.og.zoLz of the respondent No.2 addressed to the respondent No.l (referred to and extracted above), \ t2 SN,.J W.P.No.15664 of 202O d)Thefactasborneonrecordindicatingthatthe petitioner's case was considered as a Special Case for creation of a supernumerary post of commandant, equivalent to the post of Superintendent of Police (Non-Cadre), in the pay scale of Rs' 56'870-1'05'810 in SARCPL, to accommodate the petitioner by duly promoting him as Commandant (Non-Cadre)' SARCPL' and to continue the said supernumerary post until his till 28'02'2018' retirement on superannuation' i'€'' whichadmittedlyhadnotbeenimplemented. The contents of the letter dated 20'11'2019 of e) the resPondent No'1 the resPondent No'2 to requesting the respondent No'1 to take further action on the request of the petitioner for implementation of Government orders issued vide G'O'Ms'No'14 dated 26.02.2018 not being implemented as on date' f) The contents of the imPugned order vide No.3693(P)/ser'tl AtlzOtg dated memorandum ? i, :" t i I t3 SN,J W.P.No.15664 oJ 2O2O

09.01 .2o2o issued by respondent No.1 to respondent No.2 (referred to and extracted above), g) The Discussion and concrusion arrived at para-qraph Nos.5 to 1O in the present order, t I I i . l \ I t l4 SN,J W.P.No.15664 of 2020 Misce[aneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ Petition, shall stand closed' //TRUE COPY// Sd/.M.NAGAMANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER To

1. The Principal Secretary, Home Dept Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad 2. The Director General of Police, Govt of Telangana, Hyderabad. 3. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

4. One CC to SRI MD.MURTUZA ALI FARUQUI, Advocate IOPUCI 5. Two CD Copies MK SA/P { I -. ..,5t C.C.TODAY HIGH COURT DATED:2510912025 $ q o u. .r:' (q, 'i" .i t-. .. ,1 $i I s", s t$\" \\ H+ ORDER WP.No.'|5664 of 2020 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. b,,