A senior officer in the Chandigarh Police has moved the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) to contest the appointment of a junior officer as Superintendent of Police (SP). The move has raised questions about procedural adherence and merit-based promotions within the police department.
The petitioner, a serving Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) with significant years of experience, alleged that the appointment bypassed standard procedures. According to the DSP, a junior officer was given the SP position despite lacking the necessary seniority or qualifications.
The aggrieved officer approached the CAT, seeking a review of the decision and asserting that such appointments could set a precedent that undermines the morale of senior officials who have served diligently.
Violation of Promotion Policies The petitioner claims the appointment disregards established norms and policies governing promotions within the police force. Merit and Seniority Overlooked The DSP argued that their seniority and exemplary service record should have been considered before appointing the junior officer. Transparency Concerns The officer also raised concerns over the lack of transparency in the selection process, calling for an impartial review.
While the police department has yet to issue an official statement, sources indicate that the appointment was made following the department’s discretion. The authorities are expected to present their case to the CAT, justifying the decision based on the officer’s performance and suitability for the role.
This legal challenge could have significant implications for the internal functioning and promotion processes within the Chandigarh Police. It highlights the need for clear and transparent guidelines to ensure fairness in appointments, fostering trust among officers.
The CAT will review the petition and examine the validity of the claims. If found valid, the appointment could be revoked, and the selection process may undergo scrutiny. The outcome of this case is likely to serve as a precedent for similar disputes in the future.