Back
2013 Supreme(Del) 414
High Court of Delhi
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG & PRATIBHA RANI JJ.
Raj Kumar Jha & Another
Versus
Union of India & Others
W.P.(C) Nos. 2683 & 7710 of 2012
Decided on : 22-04-2013.
For the Appearing Parties:Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Advocate instructed by Sanjeev Chaswal, Ms. Saahila Lamba, Ms. Tinu Bajwa, Amandeep Joshi, R.V. Sinha, R.N. Singh, Rajinder Nishal, Ashish Nischal, Naresh Kaushik, Ms. Aditi Gupta, Ms. Amita Kalkal Chaudhary for UPSC, Advocates.
A junior officer cannot draw a higher grade pay than his senior.
Headnote:
INDIAN POLICE SERVICE - PROMOTION/INDUCTION - OFFICERS OF DANIPS - FIXATION OF SENIORITY - IPS (REGULATION OF SENIORITY) RULES, 1988 - IPS (APPOINTMENT BY PROMOTION) REGULATIONS, 1955 - IPS (PAY) RULES, 2007 - AMENDMENTS - INTERPRETATION - ANOMALY - DIRECTIONS TO AMEND RULES - INDUCTION OF OFFICERS IN IPS - SENIORITY - DIRECTIONS ISSUED.
Fact of the Case:
Raj Kumar Jha and Suvashish Choudhary (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Jha’ and ‘Choudhary’ respectively) joined DANIPS on April 30, 1987. On April 17, 1997, Jha and Choudhary were promoted in the Selection Grade w.e.f December 09, 1995. Jha and Choudhary became eligible for promotion to the JAG-II and JAG-I in the years 2000 and 2007 respectively, but no meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee was convened to consider said officers for promotion to the said grades till the year 2006. Finally, on May 5, 2007 and March 03, 2010, said officers were promoted to JAG-II and JAG-I respectively, but only on ‘ad-hoc basis’. Thereafter Jha and Choudhary submitted a representation to the competent authority requiring the department to convene a meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee to consider them for promotion to JAG-II and JAG-I on regular basis and promote them to said grades with effect from the date they become eligible for promotion to the said grades or at least from the date when vacancies fell in the said grades.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was an anomaly in the IPS (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1988 which governs determination of seniority of the officers of the State Police Service on promotion to IPS. The court held that the effect of the said Rule was that officers working in State Police Service such as Jha were made juniors to the officers who were directly recruited in the IPS and drawing lesser pay scale and grade pay than them. The court further held that a junior officer cannot draw a higher grade pay than his senior.
Issues: 1. Whether there was an anomaly in the IPS (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1988 which governs determination of seniority of the officers of the State Police Service on promotion to IPS? 2. Whether a junior officer can draw a higher grade pay than his senior?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that there was an anomaly in the IPS (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1988 which governs determination of seniority of the officers of the State Police Service on promotion to IPS. The court held that the effect of the said Rule was that officers working in State Police Service such as Jha were made juniors to the officers who were directly recruited in the IPS and drawing lesser pay scale and grade pay than them. The court further held that a junior officer cannot draw a higher grade pay than his senior.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition filed by Jha and directed the Ministry of Home Affairs to amend Rule 3(ii)(a) and (b) of the IPS (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1988 to bring it in line with the (amended) provisions of IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 and IPS (Pay) Rules, 2007. The court further directed the Ministry of Home Affairs to induct Jha in the IPS on his submitting an unconditional willingness in said regards and fix his seniority in the IPS as per the Rule 3(ii)(a) and (b) of the IPS (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1988 which would be amended in terms of above directions given by the court.
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.
1. The Indian Police Service (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPS’) is one of the many All India Civil Services. The pay band(s) and grade pay(s) admissible to a member of the IPS are as follows:-
2. Appointment to the service is by direct recruitment as also promotion/induction of substantive members of State Police Services including the Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshwadeep, Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli Police Service (hereinafter referred to as the ‘DANIPS’). Eligibility for appointment by promotion is 8 years of regular service in the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police or any other equivalent post.
3. As is clear from its nomenclature, DANIPS is a law enforcement police force in-charge of Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Lakshwadeep, Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli. There are following 4 grades in DANIPS:-
4. In the two captioned writ petitions, we are concerned with the promotion/induction of officers of DANIPS in IPS.
5. The promotion/induction of an officer of a State Police Service, including DANIPS, in IPS is governed by 5 Rules viz.:-
(i) IPS (Recruitment) Rules, 1954;
(ii) IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955;
(iii) IPS (Pay) Rules, 2007;
(iv) IPS (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1988; and
(v) IPS (Uniform) Rules, 1954.
6. The Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 deal with the promotion of an officer of a State Police Service including DANIPS to the IPS. Being relevant for our discussion, Regulations 2, 5, 7 and 9 need to be noted. They read as under:-
“2. DEFINITIONS:-
(I) In these regulations, unless the context otherwise requires:
(j) State Police Service means:
i) For the purpose of filling up the vacancies in the Indian Police Service cadre of the Arunachal Pradesh-Goa-Mizoram-Union Territories under rule 9 of the Recruitment Rules, any of the following services namely:-
a) The Delhi and Andaman & Nicobar Islands Police Service.
5. PREPARATION OF A LIST OF SUITBALE OFFICERS:-
(1) Each Committee shall ordinarily meet every year and prepare a list of such members of the State Police Service as are held by them to be suitable for promotion to the Service. The number of members of the State Police Service to be included in the list shall be determined by the Central Government in consultation with the State Government concerned, and shall not exceed the number of substantive vacancies as on the first day of January of the year in which the meeting is held, in the posts available for them under rule 9 of the Recruitment Rules.
(2) The Committee shall consider for inclusion to the said list, the cases of members of the State Police Services in the order of seniority in that service of a number which is equal to three times the number referred in sub-regulation (1).
Provided also that the Committee shall not consider the case of a member of the State Police Service unless on the first day of the January of the year for which the Select List is prepared he is substantive in the State Police Service and has completed not less than eight years of continuous service (whether officiating or substantive) in the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police or in any other post or posts declared equivalent thereto by the State Government.
X X X
7. SELECT LIST:-
(1) The Commission shall consider the list prepared by the Committee along with:
a) the documents received from the State Government under regulation 6;
b) the observations of the Central Government and unless it considers any change necessary, approve the list.
(2) ……
(3) The list as finally approved by the Commission shall form the Select List of the members of the State Police Service.
(4) The Select List shall remain in force till the 31st day of December of the year in which the meeting of the Selection Committee was held with a view to prepare the list under sub-regulation (1) of regulation 5 or up to 60 days from the date of approval of the S
