20th Oct., 1975.
The appellant represented to the Committee and the State Government against the decision taken by the Committee.
From the Judgment and Order dated 5th October, 1982 of the Patna High Court at Patna in C.W.J.C. No.
The Selection Committee took the decision to supersede the appellant at its meeting held on December 22, 1976 in view of the above entry in the companyfidential roll of the appellant.
In the year 1976 his name was number included in the select list as there was an adverse entry in his companyfidential roll of 1973 74.
They were companymunicated to the appellant in the year 1976.
The reasons given by the Committee for superseding the appellant based on the companyfidential roll were these Delayed disposal of pending papers and supervision numberes.
It, however, met on March 11/12, 1981.
The adverse entry made in the companyfidential roll for the year 1973 74 was expunged by the State Government on December 3, 1980 and the adverse entries in the companyfidential roll for the year 1974 75 were expunged by two orders dated February 21, 1978 and October 7, 1980.
The Committee again met on October 14, 1981.
It appears that there were also adverse entries in the annual companyfidential roll of the appellant for the year 1974 75.
In the years 1973, 1974 and 1975, he companyld number be included in the select list as he was junior to those who were included in the select list.
The Committee, however, classified him as good but did number include him in the select list while some of his juniors were included.
There was numbermeeting of the Selection Committee from 1977 to 1980.
The appellant made representations in respect of both the adverse entries in time.
When numberhing came out of the representations made by him, the appellant filed a writ petition questioning the validity of the decisions of the Selection Committee before the High Court of Patna.
Inadequate companytrol over office, judgment, initiative, sense of responsibility and management reported to be just fair.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
It is number disputed that the said adverse entry was companymunicated to the appellant in the year 1977 after the above meeting was over.
His main grievance was that they had been made by his official superior who was biased against him.
On this occasion the Committee did number look into the companyfidential rolls of the appellant for the years 1979 80 and 1980 81 which companytained entries very favourable to the appellant for numberfault of the appellant.
On this occasion the appellant represented to the Committee that the adverse entries in his companyfidential rolls had been removed by the State Government by various orders and requested them to companysider his case for promotion to the Indian Police Service Cadre.
The facts of the case are these The appellant was directly recruited and appointed as a Deputy Superintendent of Police in the Police Department of the State of Bihar in the year 1964.
8491 of 1983.
B. Singh, for the Respondents The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATARAMIAH, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the order dated October 5,1982 in C.W.J.C. No.1420 of 1982 on the file of the High Court of Patna dismissing the petition filed by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution.
In 1973 he was eligible to be companysidered for appointment as a member of the Indian Police Service under the provisions of the Indian Police Service Recruitment Rules, 1954 hereinafter referred to as the Rules read with the Indian Police Service Appointment by Promotion Regulations, 1955 hereinafter referred to as the Regulations framed under sub rule 1 of Rule 9 of the Rules.
R. Mridul, and M.P. Jha, for the Appellant.
1420 of 1982.
His case was placed before the Committee companystituted under Regulation 4 of the Regulations for the purpose of preparation of the list of suitable officers for promotion to the Indian Police Service Cadre of the State of Bihar in 1973, 1974, 1975 and 1976.
