Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010195212025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5117/2025 KAJAL KR DAS S/O NARAYAN KR. DAS, R/O VILL- NIZE BEKELE, P.O.- SIMLA TARABARI, P.S.- BOKO, DIST- KAMRUP (R) VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT, GUWAHATI-06, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM 2:DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI DIST- KAMRUP (M) 3:ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (STF) ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI DIST- KAMRUP (M) 4:INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (ADMINISTRATION) ASSAM GUWAHATI DIST- KAMRUP (M) 5:THE ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (ADMINISTRATION) ASSAM GUWAHATI DIST- KAMRUP (M) 6:THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Page No.# 2/7 GUWAHATI POLICE COMMISSIONERATE DIST- KAMRUP (M) 7:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE GORCHUK POLICE STATION GORCHUK GUWAHATI DIST- KAMRUP (M Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BORTHAKUR, MR. Z H BORA,MS. S KAKATI Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 05.06.2026 1. Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. U. Sharma, learned Government Advocate. 2. By this application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed that the respondent authorities should consider his promotion to the post of Lance Naik (AB) from the post of Driver Constable with all service benefits. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he was working as Constable driver at 20th A.P.(IR) Battalion, Panbari, Dhubri. While he was working in the said capacity he successfully completed his D & M course vide order dated 24.12.2015 issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Assam and subsequently, posted at Special Task Force Assam, Srimantapur, Guwahati after being released from 20th Battalion. The petitioner joined in STF on 31.03.2016 and since then the petitioner is working in the said STF. Page No.# 3/7 4. While the petitioner was working as such he was arrested in connection with Gorchuk PS Case No. 191/2017 registered under Section 384/34 IPC. Later on, more offences were added in the said case to the effect of Section 365/342 of the IPC and he was sent to judicial custody. The petitioner was however, released on bail subsequently. 5. On being arrested, the petitioner was placed under suspension vide order dated 01.06.2017 and a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner for serious misconduct and dereliction of duty. 6. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has submitted a representation before the authorities for his reinstatement and considering his prayer the petitioner was released from suspension by order dated 18.11.2017 and he was back in his service. In the said order it was stated that departmental proceeding will continue against the petitioner. 7. Before the said order dated 18.11.2017, the petitioner was served with show cause notice on 15.09.2017 by which he was directed to show cause for the charges to the effect that while he was posted at STF Srimantapur, Guwahati as Driver Constable on 11.05.2017 he accompanied another police personnel and proceeded to a particular place in a government vehicle wherein the victim and two others were picked up and money was demanded from them and as a result money to the amount of Rs.4,00,000/- was paid and the said victims were released on the same day at around 8 pm on 11.05.2017. For the alleged serious misconduct and dereliction of duty on his part the petitioner was served with the said show cause notice. 8. A statement of the allegation was also appended with the said show Page No.# 4/7 cause notice along with the list of documents and list of witnesses. During the said departmental proceeding the victim by his letter dated 07.12.2017 addressed to the Disciplinary Authority had intimated that he had lodged the FIR alleging that he and others were arrested in connection with selling and purchasing of petroleum and that they were released after they paid a huge sum of money to the STF police personnel but in the said intimation it was clarified that the petitioner and others were not involved in the said demand and taking of money and a prayer was made to drop the charges against the petitioner and others. 9. Thereafter, the Inquiry Officer had submitted the inquiry report before the Disciplinary Authority and on the basis of the same the Disciplinary Authority had passed order on 24.03.2020. It was held that the Inquiry Officer had given a report dated 30.01.2020 stating inter alia that charges of serious misconduct and dereliction of duty against petitioner were not approved and in pursuance to the said finding submitted by the Inquiry Officer the Disciplinary Authority on further examination of the relevant records agreed with the finding of the said Inquiry Officer and the charges leveled against the petitioner was stated to have not been proved. 10. In consequence thereof the Disciplinary Authority held that the period of suspension w.e.f. 02.06.2017 to 18.11.2017 excluding the period of judicial custody was treated as if the petitioner was on duty and the period of judicial custody was treated to be dies non i.e. on the principle of no work no pay. By the said order the departmental proceeding was disposed of accordingly. 11. Thereafter, by order dated 27.09.2023 the Secretary to the Page No.# 5/7 Government of Assam issued a notification that the Governor of Assam had given approval to implement an assured carrier progression scheme for three ranks i.e. for constable the promotion should be made to Lance Naik and from Lance Naik to Naik and from Naik to Havildar subject to the condition that the employee should complete at least eight years of regular service. 12. In pursuance thereof Additional Superintendent of Police by his communication to the Assistant Inspector General of Police had intimated that he had enclosed the service particulars of all the police personnel as per prescribed format for providing benefits of Assured Carrier Progression Scheme and in the said information it is seen that in case of the petitioner, it is stated that the departmental proceeding is continuing which however, is not correct because by then departmental proceeding was disposed of. 13. It is the case of the petitioner that number of promotions were made under the said carrier progress scheme but he was left out in view of the said incorrect information. As such aggrieved, he submitted a representation before the Director General of Police but till date he submits that no action was taken. 14. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed the office memorandum dated 09.05.2006 wherein it was provided in paragraph No.5 that there is no requirement of furnishing a separate integrity certificate to the Departmental Promotion Committee or any other Authority and further by judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India vs K. V. Jankiraman reported in (1991) 4 SCC 109, it was held that no promotion can be withheld on the basis of suspension or doubt. It was further held by the Supreme Court that when any case is pending against Page No.# 6/7 the employee and the same is in the investigation stage, no promotion can be stopped. However, the matter would be different if charge-sheet is filed. In the instant case it is seen that the petitioner was arrested in view of a criminal case and the investigation is on. 15. Learned counsel for the respondent Ms. U. Sharma on being asked by this Court has placed the instructions that investigation is not complete and charge-sheet is yet to be filed. It is also seen in the instant case that the petitioner was exonerated of his charges by the Disciplinary Authority and the disciplinary proceeding was disposed of on 21.03.2020 and before the same he was also reinstated in his service as Constable in the STF. Further, the information given by the Additional SP that the departmental proceeding against the petitioner was continuing is also an incorrect information because the said information was given after the said DP was disposed of. 16. In view of the same and in view of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court there is no impediment for the authorities concerned to promote the petitioner to the next higher post of Lance Naik if not found ineligible for some other reasons. 17. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the direction that the authorities concern would consider the promotion of the petitioner to the next higher post of Lance Naik in view of the exercises undertaken by the authorities concerned for such promotion. 18. The said exercise is to be completed within a period of one month from the receipt of the certified copy of this order. The petitioner is directed to place the same before the authorities at the earliest. Page No.# 7/7 19. It is further directed that the petitioner should be considered for promotion to the next higher grade from the date on which his juniors were promoted. 20. With this observation this petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant