G. BIKSHAPATHY, J.

( 1 ) THE Writ Petition is directed against the orders passed by the learned Central administrative Tribunal in O. A. No. 443 of 2002, dated: 24-2-2003.

( 2 ) THE Writ Petitioner is the applicant before the tribunal. The petitioner was initially appointed as Sub-Inspector (Reserve) in 1968 and subsequently he was transferred as Sub-Inspector (Civil) in 1976. He was promoted as Inspector in 1983 and on 18-10-1986 he was promoted as Deputy superintendent of Police on out of turn basis. With effect from 1-1-1995, the petitioner was further promoted as additional Superintendent of Police. He was further promoted as Superintendent of police (Non-Cadre) with effect from 17-10-2000. Petitioner submits that as per the indian Police (Appointment by Promotion) regulations, 1955 (for short regulations ), he became-eligible to be included in the select list for confirmation of I. P. S. However, for various reasons, the Selection Committee did not meet. Finally, Selection Committee met for preparation of select list for the years 1996-97,1998 and 1999 on 25-12-1999 and prepared the same. However, the said select list was cancelled by virtue of the orders passed by the tribunal and the authorities were directed to prepare fresh select list. Accordingly, Selection Committee met on 20-8-2001 and prepared select list for the aforesaid three years. But, however, we are concerned with the select list for the year 1999 and in fact the petitioner has challenged the same to the extent of the said list in this Writ Petition. It is the case of the petitioner that he was graded "outstanding" for four years out of five years period and for one year he was graded "very good". Yet, the Selection Committee graded the petitioner as "very good" and the same was approved by the U. E. S. C. and ultimately, notification was issued by the government of India dated: 21-1-2002 and 15-2-2002. The said notification was challenged by the petitioner before the central Administrative Tribunal in o. A. No. 443 of 2002. The learned tribunal by an order dated: 24-2-2003 dismissed the O. A. filed by the petitioner, against which the present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner.

( 3 ) THE learned Senior Counsel mr. E. Manohar appearing for the petitioner submits that the action of the official respondents in preparing the select list is illegal and contrary to the provisions and regulations, more especially Regulation no. 5 and that Selection Committee has not properly applied its mind to the case of the petitioner and thus his case was meted out with unfair treatment. It is the further case of the petitioner that the officer had maintained the excellent and outstanding track record throughout his service and not placing such an outstanding officer in the select list and placing in less meritorious candidates is wholly illegal and arbitrary offending Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution of India. Therefore, he submits that the order of the tribunal is liable to be set aside.

( 4 ) ON the other hand, the learned counsel for the official respondents and also the unofficial respondents submit that the preparation of the panel is in accordance with the Rules and Regulations and any interference with the select panel prepared by the Selection Committee as approved by the U. P. S. C. and accepted by the Central government would amount to exercising the jurisdiction in excess of the powers of judicial review. The tribunal has considered the respective merits also and held that the petitioner was not entitled for any relief and therefore, the impugned Order is legal and valid and no interference is warranted. Hence, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.

( 5 ) THE issue that arises for consideration is whether the Order of learned Central administrative Tribunal is valid?

( 6 ) THE facts are not much in dispute. Moreover, we are only concerned with the selection process undertaken by the selection Committee as affirmed and approved by the U. P. S.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document