CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.60/884/2021 On this the 4^th Day of December, 2025 CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. SURESH KUMAR BATRA, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE MRS. RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI, MEMBER (A)

Ashok Kumar Batth, Aged 62 years, s/o Lt. Capt. Harbans Lal r/o #2026-B, Block 18, CHB Flats, Sector 63, Chandigarh (U.T.), Group-A.

…. Applicant (By Advocate: Sh. S.P.S. Baath).

Versus

1. Union of India through Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi 110011.

2. Union Public Service Commission through its Secretary, Dholpur House Shahjahan road, New Delhi, 110069.

3. State of Punjab through Addl. Chief Secretary, Government of Punjab, Department of Home Affairs and Justice, Punjab Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh 160001.

….Respondents (By Advocate: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, Sr. CGSC, Sh. B.B. Sharma, Sh.

Ajaib Singh, Addl. AG Pb.).

O R D E R

PER: MRS. RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI, MEMBER (A)

1. Present original application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking following relief:-

Quash notification No.I-14011/22/2020IPS.I(E)(VI)(b) dated 07.04.2021 (Annexure A-1) issued by the respondent No.1 to the extent the name of the applicant has not been included therein qua vacancies of 2015 (Select List 2015) whereas in select list for the year 2015 which has been prepared by the selection committee on 29.01.2021, he stands at serial No.1 against vacancies 2 for available the said year, and quashing thereof to that extent, being violative of law laid by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in C.L. Lakhanpal versus UPSC and others 1998 (3) SLR 436 and judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in WR(Civil) No. 844 of 2013 titled as Mahesh Chand v. UOI and others decided on 16.10.2014 and other judgements rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal as detailed in the body of O.A.

(ii) Direct the respondent No.1 & 3 to issue corrigendum to the notification dated 07.04.2021 (A-1) or issue fresh notification so as to include the names of the applicant at its appropriate place i.e. serial No.1 in terms of the select list of 2015 prepared by the selection Committee and to offer him appointment to IPS (Punjab Cadre) w.e.f. due date with all the consequential benefits including revised retiral benefits qua the vacancies for the year 2015 in terms of the judgments of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in C.L. Lakhanpal versus UPSC and others 1998 (3) SLR 436 and judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in WR (Civil) No.844 of 2013 titled as Mahesh Chand versus UOI and others decided on 16.10.2014 and other judgments assed by this Tribunal as given in the body of the Ο.Α.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed as Inspector of Police in Punjab Police on 04.04.1988 and promoted to the rank of DSP on 12.05.1993 later on confirmed also. Thereafter, the applicant was placed in the rank of Offg. Supdt. of Police in 2002. Further promotion from Punjab Police Service is to the Indian Police Service, which is governed by the Indian Police Service, Recruitment Rules 1954 read with Indian Police Service (Appointment by promotion) Regulations, 1955. As per the regulations, list of suitable officers is to be prepared by the Selection Committee every year. However, due to one reason or another including the dispute regarding seniority, select list for the year 2014 onwards could not be prepared. The dispute regarding the seniority of the Punjab Police Service was settled by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CWP No. 6801/2013 vide judgment dated 02.11.2018, wherein the Hon'ble high Court was pleased to direct the State Govt. to reframe the seniority list and conclude the exercise within two months to proceed with the finalization of review of the Select List of 2010 to 2013 and preparation of Select List of 2014 to 2018. It is also pertinent to mention here that the process for preparation of Select List had already been initiated prior