W.P.(C) 8654/2021

Page 1 of 77

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

W.P.(C) 8654/2021 & CM APPL. 26788/2021 (stay)

%

SADRE ALAM

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. B.S. Bagga, Advocate

Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General

of India with Chetan Sharma, Additional Solicitor

General, Mr. Amit Mahajan, Central Government

Standing Counsel, Mr. Amit Gupta, Mr. Vinay

Yadav, Mr. Akshay Gadeock and Mr. Sahaj Garg,

Advocates for Respondent No.1.

Mr.

Mukul

Rohatgi,

Senior

Advocate,

Mr. Maninder Singh, Senior Advocate with

Ms. Diksha Rai, Ms. Devanshi Singh, Mr. Ankit

Agarwal, Mr. Prabhas Bajaj and Ms. Palak

Mahajan, Advocates for Respondent No.2.

Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Ms. Neha Rathi and

Mr. Jatin Bhardwaj, Advocates for Intervener.

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

JUDGMENT

:

Per D. N. PATEL, Chief Justice

1.

Present public interest litigation has been preferred seeking the

following reliefs:-

“a.

2021:DHC:3261-DB

W.P.(C) 8654/2021

Page 2 of 77

b.

d.

of the instant case.”

2.

We have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner

at length. Petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 27.07.2021,

whereby Inter-Cadre deputation has been granted to Respondent No.2 –

Mr.Rakesh Asthana, from Gujarat Cadre to AGMUT Cadre as also

extension of his service, initially for a period of one year beyond the date of

his superannuation on 31.07.2021 or until further orders, whichever is earlier

and his appointment as Commissioner of Police, Delhi. Challenge is also

laid to the order dated 27.07.2021 whereby approval was granted by

2021:DHC:3261-DB

W.P.(C) 8654/2021

Page 3 of 77

Appointments Committee of Cabinet for Inter-Cadre deputation of

Respondent No. 2 as well as extension of his service beyond the age of

superannuation.

3.

Respondent No. 2 is a 1984 Batch officer of the Indian Police

Services („IPS‟), Gujarat Cadre and his date of superannuation was

31.07.2021. Vide the impugned order dated 27.07.2021, Respondent No. 1

has granted Inter-Cadre deputation to Respondent No. 2 and extended his

services beyond the date of superannuation. Vide the same order,

Respondent No. 2 has been appointed as Commissioner of Police, Delhi.

Assailing the said order, it was contended by learned counsel appearing on

behalf of the Petitioner that the impugned order (Annexure P-2 to the memo

of this petition) has been passed in total violation of provisions of Rule

56(d) of the Fundamental Rules and Supplementary Rules (hereinafter

referred to as „FR-56(d)‟); All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement

Benefits) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as „Rules, 1958‟); All India

Services (Conditions of Service - Residuary Matters) Rules, 1960

(hereinafter referred to as „Rules, 1960‟), as well as in violation of Office

Memorandum dated 08.11.2004, issued by Department of Personnel and

Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions,

Government of India, (hereinafter referred to as „DoPT‟).

4.

It was further contended by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the

appointment of Respondent No.2, is also in violation of the directions issued

by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prakash Singh’s Case (I), (2006) 8 SCC

1, wherein it was directed that DGP of the State shall be selected by the

State Government from amongst the three senior most officers of the

Department who have been empanelled for promotion to that rank by Union

2021:DHC:3261-DB

W.P.(C) 8654/2021

Page 4 of 77

Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as „UPSC‟), on the basis

of their length of service, very good record and range of experience for

heading the Police Force. Once selected for the job, the DGP should have a

minimum tenure of at least two years, irrespective of his date of

superannuation. For this, reliance was placed on paragraphs