‘Registration of criminal case against public servant is bar for promotion’
DECCAN CHRONICLE.
PublishedJul 7, 2019, 1:58 am IST
The judge said the government servant must have clean records of service.
Madras high court
Chennai: The Madras high court has observed that any public servant much less than the police officer in Uniformed Service is not exempted from the principle that registration of criminal case against the public servant is a bar for further promotion to the higher post.
Disposing of a petition from S.Thennarasu, which sought to quash an order of deferment of promotion issued by the Commissioner of Police, Madurai, Justice S.M.Subramaniam directed the COP, Madurai to consider the case of the petitioner, after disposal of the criminal case and if there is no other impediment for grant of promotion to the post of Inspector of Police, and strictly in accordance with the promotion rules in force.
The judge also directed the DGP to issue a circular within 6 weeks to all the police officers across the state with reference to the Rule 4 of the Conduct Rules, which prohibits receipt of gifts, rewards and dowry, so as to avoid the same.
Petitioner was directly recruited as Sub-Inspector of Police and his promotion to the post of Inspector of Police which was already granted by the Head Office, was deferred on the ground that a criminal case was pending. Challenging the order of deferment, the petitioner has filed the present petition.
The judge said this court was of the considered opinion that pendency of the criminal case or currency of punishment was a bar for promotion to the higher post. As per the records, the petitioner was suffering with the punishment imposed based on the proved charges and this apart, the criminal case was pending against the petitioner during the relevant point of time. The promotion was to the post of Inspector of Police in the Uniformed Services. Verification of such records was of paramount importance. The SI, who was facing criminal case as well as punishment, cannot be considered for promotion to the higher post of Inspector of Police. Verification of these records were eminent and the officials, who were all having clean records of service, alone were to be considered for further promotion, more particularly, in Uniformed Services, the judge added.
The judge said the government servant must have clean records of service. His behaviour both inside the office and outside the office and while performing duties and while not performing the duties must be good and always the public servant was expected to maintain good conduct in the public. It was not as if a police officer, who was off duty, can involve in some criminal cases or commit certain misconducts, the judge added.
The judge said the Rule 4 of Conduct Rules specifically states that gifts, rewards and dowry were prohibited. If at all received amounts to misconduct. Even Rule 3 provides employment of near relatives in companies and firms. Rule 4 (1) (b) states that “complementary gift of flowers or fruits or similar articles” were also prohibited. “In respect of the Conduct Rules, it is visible in the public domain that large number of flowers and bouquets are shared by way of gifts in the police department. It is broadcasted through various TV channels also. Thus, the DGP is bound to remind the Conduct Rules to all the police officials, so as to ensure that such costly flowers and bouquets are not presented to any police officials”, the judge added.
DECCAN CHRONICLE.
PublishedJul 7, 2019, 1:58 am IST
The judge said the government servant must have clean records of service.
Madras high court
Chennai: The Madras high court has observed that any public servant much less than the police officer in Uniformed Service is not exempted from the principle that registration of criminal case against the public servant is a bar for further promotion to the higher post.
Disposing of a petition from S.Thennarasu, which sought to quash an order of deferment of promotion issued by the Commissioner of Police, Madurai, Justice S.M.Subramaniam directed the COP, Madurai to consider the case of the petitioner, after disposal of the criminal case and if there is no other impediment for grant of promotion to the post of Inspector of Police, and strictly in accordance with the promotion rules in force.
The judge also directed the DGP to issue a circular within 6 weeks to all the police officers across the state with reference to the Rule 4 of the Conduct Rules, which prohibits receipt of gifts, rewards and dowry, so as to avoid the same.
Petitioner was directly recruited as Sub-Inspector of Police and his promotion to the post of Inspector of Police which was already granted by the Head Office, was deferred on the ground that a criminal case was pending. Challenging the order of deferment, the petitioner has filed the present petition.
The judge said this court was of the considered opinion that pendency of the criminal case or currency of punishment was a bar for promotion to the higher post. As per the records, the petitioner was suffering with the punishment imposed based on the proved charges and this apart, the criminal case was pending against the petitioner during the relevant point of time. The promotion was to the post of Inspector of Police in the Uniformed Services. Verification of such records was of paramount importance. The SI, who was facing criminal case as well as punishment, cannot be considered for promotion to the higher post of Inspector of Police. Verification of these records were eminent and the officials, who were all having clean records of service, alone were to be considered for further promotion, more particularly, in Uniformed Services, the judge added.
The judge said the government servant must have clean records of service. His behaviour both inside the office and outside the office and while performing duties and while not performing the duties must be good and always the public servant was expected to maintain good conduct in the public. It was not as if a police officer, who was off duty, can involve in some criminal cases or commit certain misconducts, the judge added.
The judge said the Rule 4 of Conduct Rules specifically states that gifts, rewards and dowry were prohibited. If at all received amounts to misconduct. Even Rule 3 provides employment of near relatives in companies and firms. Rule 4 (1) (b) states that “complementary gift of flowers or fruits or similar articles” were also prohibited. “In respect of the Conduct Rules, it is visible in the public domain that large number of flowers and bouquets are shared by way of gifts in the police department. It is broadcasted through various TV channels also. Thus, the DGP is bound to remind the Conduct Rules to all the police officials, so as to ensure that such costly flowers and bouquets are not presented to any police officials”, the judge added.
No comments:
Post a Comment