The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the competent authority to take decision within 30 days on a representation of state police service officer Arun Kumar Mishra relating to his promotion to IPS.
Justice Sanjay Dwivedi directed the petitioner (Arun Kumar Mishra state police service officer) may approach the competent authority making a representation bringing all subsequent event and development into the knowledge of the authority so as to take appropriate decision, the court order said.
It is made clear if such representation is made to the authority and if the authority comes to the conclusion that the charge-sheet issued to the petitioner can be dropped in view of the subsequent development without influencing with the pending writ petition and interim protection granted by this Court, the said authority is free to take appropriate decision, the court order said.
It is further made clear that if the said authority is also of the opinion that the case of the petitioner can be considered in any of the DPC, if any is convened, for consideration of promotion and the petitioner is otherwise within the zone of consideration, then they may also consider his case for the same purpose, the court order said.
In that event, recommendation of DPC would be subject to final decision of pending writ petition. If the representation is made within a period of 15 days from today, then the authority will take an appropriate decision within a further pa further period of 30 days there from, the court order said.
Mishra filed the petition seeking quashing of chargesheet dated 24.02.2021 and questioned its legality, validity and propriety, said Advocate Pankaj Dubey appeared for him.
The counsel further submits the pending departmental enquiry is coming in the way of petitioner for considering his case for promotion to the post of IPS.
The petitioner submitted a rejoinder pointed out the charge-sheet issued to him was on basis of a search conducted by the Income Tax Department against one Prateek Joshi, in which, some loose papers containing some unaccounted cash transactions were found and those entries made basis for drawing inference that the petitioner has handed over an amount of Rs.7.5 crores to Prateek Joshi whereas there is no documentary proof of it, the counsel said.
