Vishwajeet Dayal vs UNION OF INDIA on 13 October 2026

1.

- By A

1. T af

2. T N

3. T H

4. T D B

5. T G

6. T D

7. T H

By Ad

CENTRAL ADMINISTR PATNA BENCH

OA/050/00024

CORA N’BLE JUSTICE MR. NARENDRA HON’BLE MR. KUMAR RAJESH

Dat Vishwajeet Dayal, Male aged a Dayal Singh, Resident of Anishabad, Patna, Pin-80000 Superintendent of Police, Muzaf Advocate(s) :- Shri Shekha Shri Sumit K -Versu he Union of India through th ffairs, Government of India, Nor he Secretary, Ministry of Hom North Block, New Delhi-110001. he Under Secretary to the Go Home affairs, Government of I 10001. he State of Bihar through t Department of Home, Governmen Bailey Road, Patna-800023. he Additional Chief Secre Government of Bihar, Sardar Pat 00023. he Union Public Service Com Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road, he Chairman, Union Public House, Shahjahan Road, New De dvocate(s) :- Shri Rabindra Ku Shri F. Afzal, SC f Shri Sarvdeo Sin Sharma and Shri Bihar.

RATIVE TRIBUNAL H, PATNA

AM A KUMAR JOHARI, MEMBER (J) H CHANDRA, MEMBER (A) Order Reserved on 21.09.202 te of Pronouncement 13.10.201 about 55 years, Son of Late Ram H.No.- A-62, Police Colony 02, presently posted as Cit ffarpur, Bihar at Muzaffarpur. ……..Applican ar Singh, Sr. Adv. with Kumar, Adv. us- he Secretary, Ministry of Hom rth Block, New Delhi-110001. me affairs, Government of Indi

overnment of India, Ministry o India, North Block, New Delh the Additional Chief Secretary nt of Bihar, Sardar Patel Bhawan etary, Department of Hom tel Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna mmission through the Chairman New Delhi-110069. Service Commission, Dholpu lhi- 110069. …….Respondent umar Choubey, ASC for UOI, for UPSC, ngh, Sr. Adv. With Shri A.K i Sanjay Kumar, for State o m y, ty nt. me a, of hi- y, n, e, a- n, ur ts

K. of Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

Section relief(s

2. instant 2.1 Th Bihar Bihar was m 147,14 applica jurisdi intenti and co of the offenc I.P.C.T Additi

O R D

PER: KUMAR RAJESH CHAN This Original Application has b n 19 of Administrative Tribunal

s) :- “8.1 In the fact and circumstan may be pleased to issu respondent authorities to Selection Committee to reco the IPS against the Select L consequential benefits inclu 8.2 In the fact and circumstan may be pleased to issu respondent authorities to m 15011/06/2023-IPS-I€ date who has been inducted int Select List 2022, has been and to grant him the year of 8.3 In the fact and circumstan may be pleased to issu respondent authorities to allotment (2012) which h immediately below him in t facts and circumstances of t 8.4 Other appropriate relief/r entitled.” The brief facts of the case of t t O.A. are discussed as follows: he fact as emerged from pleading State Police Service in February Public Service Commission. In made an accused in Kotwali P.S. 49,323 and 307 of Indian Penal ant that on 07th day of Nov ction of Kotwali Police Stati on, the accused persons wrong ommitted murder and also cause said offence and gave false in e punishable under section 342 Thereafter, the applicant was pu onal Sessions Judge-V, Patna,

D E R NDRA, MEMBER (A) been filed by the applicant Unde l Act 1985 seeking the followin nces of the case this Hon’ble Cou e a direction to the concerne convene a review meeting of th onsider the applicant’s promotion t List of 2017 and to grant him all th uding 2012 as the year of allotment nces of the case this Hon’ble Cou e a direction to the concerne modify the order bearing File No. d 28.10.2024 whereby the applican to the Indian Police Service for th given the year of allotment of 201 f allotment 2012. nces of the case this Hon’ble Cou e a direction to the concerne grant the applicant the year o has been granted to the officer theSelect List of 2017 in view of th this case. reliefs for which the applicant the applicant as delineated in th gs is that the applicant joined th ry 1999 upon his selection by th the early years of his service, h Case No. 503/2003 instituted u Code. It was alleged against th vember 2003 within the loc ion, in furtherance of commo gfully confined one Amit Kuma ed disappearance of the evidenc nformation and hence committe 2, 307 converted to 302, 201/3 ut on trial before the Court of th in Sessions Case No. 1463 o er ng urt ed he to he t. urt ed I- nt he urt ed of rs he is he he he he u/s he al on ar ce ed he of Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

2013, Court 2.2 In court, appoin of 201 was co 2018, the Cr Certifi letter Govern procee furnish entries Comm was pl declare Select held on and fin 2.3 No Servic allotm proved allotm officer Applic him.Ap given. Applic Suprem 1991 (

and after conclusion of the tri on 2nd February, 2024. the period, when the case was the Ministry of Home Affair ntment by promotion to the Bihar 7, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and ontinuously included and recomm 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022, pro riminal Proceeding pending aga icate by the State Government. dated 16.02.2024 had intim nment of India, Ministry of H eding pending against the ap hed the Integrity Certificate for S s in the Annual Confidential R mission vide letter dated29.02.20 laced before the Commission an e the provisionally included na list of 2022 prepared by the Se n 06.12.2023 for promotion to th nal." ow the claim of the applicant is es whose name figured below h ment from 2012 andasno charge d and he has been acquitted from mentto the IPS be fixed as 2012 rs immediately below him who f cant has further stated that one p pplicant is claiming the same b Hence the O.A. cant has relied upon the Jud me Court in the case of UOI V (SC) 2010.

al, he was acquitted by the sai pending adjudication by the tri s had determined vacancies fo r Cadre of IPS for the Select Lis 2022. The name of the applican mended in the Select List of 2017 ovisionally subject to clearance i ainst him and grant of Integrit The Government of Bihar vid mated to the Secretary to th Home Affairs, that the crimina pplicant has been dropped an Select List 2022 with reference t Report.The Union Public Servic 024 had intimated that the matte d the Commission had decided t ame of applicant at Sl No. 1 election Committee in its meetin he IPS of Bihar as "unconditiona s that the officers of Bihar Polic him have been given the year o es against the applicant could b m all charges therefore his year o 2 which has been granted to th figured in the Select List of 2017 post has been carried forward fo benefits as his juniors have bee dgement passed by the Hon'b Vs K.V. Jankiraman etc. (AIR id al or ts nt 7, in ty de he al nd to ce er to at ng al ce of be of he

7. or en le R Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

3. statem

Per contra, in response to t ments have been filed by three set

3.1. Respondents no. 01 to Government of India)in their w the process for selection to promotion from the State Polic determination of vacancies by th promotion quota of any State fo on the recommendation of determination, the state Govern UPSC containing the details/r Service officers in order of senio details/records, and thereafter c meeting. The Ministry had deter by promotion to the Bihar Cadr 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 202 was included in the Select List p in the Criminal Proceeding pe Integrity Certificate by the State not be appointed to the IPS as U as "Unconditional and final" respective Select List. Therefo Select List 2017wascarried forw the applicant into the IPS. As s for the applicant for the Select L 2021. The UPSC declared his n on 29.02.2024 for the inclusion 2022 and accordingly Mini notification.All the procedure conduct of proceedings right f State Government to finalizat recommendation by UPSC. He earlier as his candidature was became 'unconditional'he was seniority in terms of prevailin the OA, three separate writte t of respondents. 03(Ministry of Home Affair written statement have stated th the Indian Police Service b ce Service officersstarts from th he Central government against th or a particular calendar year base State Government. After th nment forwards a proposal to th records of eligible State Polic ority. The UPSC scrutinizes thes convenes a selection Committe rmined vacancies for appointmen re of IPS for the Select List 2017 22 wherein the name of applican provisionally subject to clearanc ending against him and grant o e Government. However, he coul UPSC had not declared his nam during the validity period o ore, 01 unfilled vacancy of th ward due to non-appointment o uch, no vacancy was kept vacan List of Year 2018, 2019, 2020 an name as "Unconditional and fina n of his name in the Select Li istry had issued appointmen es were diligently followed i from submission of name by th tion of Select List and makin e could not be appointed to IP not 'unconditional' and when appointed to IPS and assigne ng Rules and Regulation.It wa en rs, at by he he ed he he ce se ee nt 7, nt ce of ld me of he of nt nd l" st nt in he ng PS it ed as Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

p p f further submitted that the Regu by Promotion) Regulations, 195

"7(4) The Select List sha the December of the year in wh committee was held with a vie regulation (1) of regulation 5 of approval of the select list regulation (1) or as the case sub-regulation (2) whichever is

Provided that where the S the proposal to declare a prov Select List as "unconditional" period when the select list was decide the matter within a per the date of meeting of the next is earlier and if the Commissio provisionally included offic unconditional and final, the officer shall be considered by regulation 9 and such appointm for the reason that it was made in force”. 3.2 Respondent no. 4 & 5(S their written statement have st (Recruitment) Rules, 1954, the p (SPS) Officers to the IPS is go by Promotion) Regulation, 195 vacancies as determined on 1st J subject to eligibility conditions said Rules provide for promotio Officers subject to a fixed quot sanctioned senior posts. The num List Year is determined by consultation with the State Gov ulation 7(4) of IPS (Appointmen 5 provides that: all remain in force till 31st day o hich the meeting of the selectio ew to prepare the list under sub or upto sixty days from the dat by the Commission under sub may be, finally approved unde s later. State Government has forwarde visionally included officer in th ", to the Commission during th in force, (the Commission sha riod of forty five days) or befor t selection committee, whicheve on declares the inclusion of th cer in the Select List a appointment of the Concerne y the Central government unde ment shall not be invalid merel e after the Select List ceased to b State Government of Bihar) i tated that as per Rule 9 of IP promotion of State Police Servic overned by the IPS (Appointmen

55. Promotions are made again January of the respective year an s Rule 9(1) and Rule 9(2) of th on from amongst substantive SP ta and exceeding one third of th mber of vacancies for each Selec the Government of India i vernment. The State Governmen nt of on b- te b- er ed he he all re er he as ed er ly be in PS ce nt nst nd he PS he ct in nt Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

thereafter forwards the propos documents including senior disciplinary and vigilance clear submitted a proposal for 33 offic eligibility list in order of seniori 11 vacancies. The name of app proposal at serial number 24. T in the eligibility list for the Sel first time his name was included continued up to Select List 20 exonerated in the criminal pr validity of Select List 2022, th 16.12.2023, approved the Selec of applicant was included a communication dated 29.02.20 into the IPS and his inter-se-sen Mohan Sharma, an IPS officer o above Sri Sagar Kumar the IP Bihar Cadre. It has been further done by the Ministry of Home India strictly in accordance Seniority) Rules, 1988. The a proceeding which rendered the and final selection non-viable a relied upon the Judgement de Court of India in R. Prabavthy SCC 377 it has been held that t right to promotion from a parti law. In the case of UOI Vs M Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indi cadre is governed solely by th Rules and cannot be claimed on the State Cadre.

3.3. In the written statement 7(UPSC)it has been stated tha sal to the UPSC with require rity list, integrity certificat rance etc. The State Governmen cers including the applicant in th ity as on 1st January, 2015 again plicant was appearing in the sai Thereafter his name was include lect List of 2016 to 2022. For th d in the Select List of 2017 whic

022. Because the applicant wa roceeding before the expiry o he UPSC in its meeting held o t List of 2022 in which the nam and pursuant to Commission 024, the applicant was inducte niority was fixed below Sri Lal of 2017 batch of Bihar Cadre an PS Officer of 2018 batch of th stated that fixation of seniority e Affairs (MHA), Government o with the IPS (Regulation o applicant was facing a crimin e issuance of integrity certificat at the relevant time. Responden elivered by the Hon’ble Suprem Vs State of Tamilnadu (2006) there is no vested or indefeasib icular date unless so provided b .A. Haque (2003) 3 SCC 516th ia has held that seniority in IP he IPS (Regulation of Seniority n the basis of length of service i t filed by Respondent no. 6 & at the name of the applicant wa ed e, nt he nst id ed he ch as of on me ns' ed lit nd he is of of al te nts me le by he PS y) in & as Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

considered for the first time in by the Selection Committee preparation of year-wise Selec induction of State Police Servi Police Service (IPS) of Bihar C respectively. At the time of prep Criminal Proceeding was inti Applicant by the State Governm respect of Applicant was also w The name of the Applicant was Select List of 2015 against 09 assessed as 'Very Good' but his inclusion in the Select List of 2 officers with similar grading an of 2015. The name of appli inclusion in the Select List of vacancies and he was overall name was not recommended fo 2016 due to availability of sen and statutory size of the Select applicant was placed in the cons of 2017, he was overall assessed recommended for inclusion provisionally, due to pendency against the applicant.Consequen of Bihar Cadre from that Selec Criminal Proceeding and Integ preparation of further Select Lis 2022 as was during preparation whenever the name of the A inclusion in the Select List for Cadre, he was recommended 'p in Criminal Proceeding and gra State Government. Later during 2022, the applicant was acquitte concurrently the integrity certif the Select List of 2015 prepare that met on 22.02.2017 fo ct Lists of 2014 and 2015 fo ce (SPS) officers into the India Cadre against 06 and 09 vacancie paration of Select List of 2015, imated as pending against th ment. The Integrity Certificate i withheld by the State Governmen s considered at Sl. No. 20 for th 9 vacancies and he was overa s name was not recommended fo 2015 due to availability of senio nd statutory size of the Select Li icant was furtherconsidered fo f 2016 at Sl. No. 12 against 0 assessed as 'Very Good' but h or inclusion in the Select List o nior officers with similar gradin t List of 2016. The name of th sideration zone for the Select Li d as 'Very Good' andhis name wa in the Select List of 201 of criminal proceedings pendin ntly, he was not appointed to IP ct List of 2017. As the status o grity Certificate was same durin sts of 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 an n of Select List of 2017, therefor Applicant was recommended fo r induction into the IPS of Biha provisionally' subject to clearanc ant of Integrity Certificate by th g the validity of the select list o ed in the criminal proceeding an ficate was also furnished by th ed or or an es a he in nt. he all or or st or his of ng he st as ng PS of ng nd re or ar ce he of nd he Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

4. record questi

(i) Wh of 201 IPS on

(ii) W of his final, to the

4.1. T and d govern the I Regul Police Regul prescr and p officer inclus also c be in f

State Government in support of regulation 7(4) of the Indian P promotion) Regulation, 1955 declared as “Unconditional and list of 2022 and the applicant g Cadre. Accordingly, the Govern Affairs provided him year of allo We have heard the parties, per ds and considered the matter ons arise for determination: hether the applicant’s provisio 17 confers upon him a right to n the basis of that select list; an Whether his subsequent acquitt s inclusion in the Select List entitles him to the year of allo officer below him in the selec The appointment of State Poli decision with regard to the ye ned by the Indian Police Serv Indian Police Service (A ations, 1955, and the senior e Service (Regulation of Senior ation 7(4) of the Appointme ribes the period during which provides for the consideration r’s case where the requisit ion is forwarded during the p contemplates appointment aft force in the circumstances spe f applicant. Therefore, in terms o Police Service (Appointment b the name of the applicant wa Final” for inclusion in the sele got appointed to the IPS of Biha nment of India, Ministry of Hom otment. rused the materials available o in its entirety. The followin onal inclusion in the Select Li o be treated as appointed to th nd tal, followed by the declaratio of 2022 as unconditional an tment 2012 as has been grante ct list of 2017. ice Service officers to the IP ear of allotment to the IPS i vice (Recruitment) Rules, 1954 Appointment by Promotion ity is governed by the India rity) Rules, 1988. ent by Promotion Regulation h a select list remains in forc n of a provisionally include te proposal for unconditiona prescribed period. The provis ter the select list has ceased t ecified therein. of by as ct ar me on ng st he on nd ed PS is 4, n) an ns ce ed al so to Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

4.2. In that th select absenc crimin in rela crimin IPS. 4.3 In 2017 w the lis his ca pende assess suitab 4.4 No (A)

n the present case, the materi he applicant’s name remained lists because of the pending ce of the requisite Integrity nal proceeding. His inclusion b ation to the Select List of 2022 nal proceedings, following w n fact, the applicant was assess where he was assessed suitabl st of 13 officers against 13 su ase getting recommended for ncy of criminal proceedings. sed as suitable and provisional and recommended and cont le and recommended, is releva ow, let us consider three differ ) Scenario I: In the early yea was made an accused in Ko instituted u/s 147,149,323 an a crime committed on 07th the local jurisdiction of furtherance of common inten personsincluding some of completion of police investig trial before the Court of the Patna, in Sessions Case N conclusion of the trial, he w on 2nd February, 2024. If t before 2016with of course, the applicant; and it was ver commenced in 2013, then t ial placed before us establishe d provisional in the successiv g criminal proceedings and th y Certificate because of thi became unconditional and fina 2 that is after his acquittal in th which he was appointed to th sed suitable in the select list o le and placed at number two i ubstantive vacancies leading t induction into IPS, but for th The fact that the applicant wa lly included in the select list o tinued to remain assessed a ant to his grievance. rent scenarios. ars of his service, the applican otwali P.S. Case No. 503/200 nd 307 of Indian Penal Code fo day of November 2003 withi Kotwali Police Station, i ntion, along with other accuse his senior police officers.O gation, the applicant was put o e Additional Sessions Judge-V No. 1463 of 2013, and afte was acquitted by the said Cou the trial would have conclude the same result of acquittal o ry much possible since the tria the applicant would have bee es ve he is al he he of in to he as of as nt or in in ed On on V, er urt ed of al en Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

(B)

promoted as per the select allotment as 2012 in the ra been no grievance of the ap OA for adjudication. The moot point for consid nothing on record to dem was at fault for the trial 2016 then why should he s not within his control and n ) Scenario II: In the early yea was made an accused in Ko instituted u/s 147,149,323 an a crime committed on 07th the local jurisdiction of furtherance of common inten persons including some of completion of police investig trial before the Court of the Patna, in Sessions Case N conclusion of the trial in the was acquitted by the said C possible since the trial com long time for conclusion. He been debarred from getting c the provisions of IPS (Appo in the subsequent select lis crossed the prescribed ag induction into the IPS befor established (His date of birt Annexure A/3 of this O.A.) acquittal might have come opportunity lost during proceedings.Should the list of 2017 with the year o ank of IPS. There would hav pplicant and no need to file th deration is that when there i monstrate that the applican not getting concluded befor suffer for something that wa not his fault? ars of his service, the applican otwali P.S. Case No. 503/200 nd 307 of Indian Penal Code fo day of November 2003 withi Kotwali Police Station, i ntion, along with other accuse his senior police officers. O gation, the applicant was put o e Additional Sessions Judge-V No. 1463 of 2013, and afte e later half of the year 2026, h Court. This was also very muc mmenced in 2013and did take ence, the applicant would hav considered for promotion as pe ointment by Promotions) Rule sts asthe applicant might hav ge or service threshold fo re his innocence was judiciall th is recorded as 25.07.1969 i . In that situation, the eventua too late to restore the caree g the pendency of th applicant suffer then fo of ve is is nt re as nt or in in ed On on V, er he ch a ve er es ve or ly in al er he or Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

(C)

4.5. T Select and th the cri He su Select referen judgm Jankir treatm pendin conseq cover

4.6. T promo IPS. T rules. Accor and th for the

4.7. T of Tam that pr something that was not w fault? ) Scenario III: Actually, the result in February 2024. N asked. Should the applica was not within his control being considered for appoi of 2017 ensuring his year o like the officer below him i The applicant contends that of t List of 2017 have been assig hat he has been denied equival iminal proceedings, which ulti ubmits that the vacancy positi tion Committee justify recon nce to the 2017 Select List. ment of the Hon’ble Supreme C raman, AIR 1991 SC 2010. T ment of promotion cases where ng disciplinary or criminal quences of complete exonerati procedure. The present dispute concerns otion, but also the year of allo The latter is specifically gove rdingly, the applicant’s acquit he timing of his acquittal has e year of allotment in the IPS. The respondents have also relie mil Nadu, (2006) 8 SCC 377 romotion from a particular dat within his control and not h trial concluded with the sam Now the same question can b nt suffer for something tha and not his fault and denie intment against the select lis of allotment in the IPS as 201 n the same select list? fficers placed below him in th gned the year of allotment 201 lent treatment solely because o imately resulted in his acquitta ion and his assessment by th nsideration of his claim wit The applicant relies upon th Court in Union of India v. K.V he said decision deals with th e consideration was affected b proceedings and explains th ion under the applicable sealed not merely consideration fo otment upon induction into th erned by the statutory seniorit ttal is a relevant circumstance become the determining facto ed upon R. Prabavathy v. Stat 7, in support of the propositio te is not an indefeasible right i is me be at ed st he of al. he th he V. he by he d- or he ty e, or te on in Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

the ab applic govern applyi

4.8. T junior can b circum year o in the canno statuto receiv

4.9. T servic validit Suprem judgm that t regard adjud The e statut uncon judici

4.10. Senior the ye linked held to appoin bsence of a legal provision co cant’s claim must, however, b ning statutory rules and the fa ing that general proposition me The applicant’s grievance re rs cannot be ignored. Neverthe be claimed only upon es mstances and governing rules of allotment assigned to office e select list of 2017 cannot t be prejudiced without ex ory conditions, to establish ve an identical year of allotmen The power of the Tribunal is n e rules as they stand; it can al ty, subject to the limitation me Court of India in the la ment in the case L. Chandr ) 3 SCC 261. In this seven-Ju ribunals can test the vires ding the service matter dicateincluding its subordina exception is that a tribunal c te (Administrative Tribu nstitutional. Tribunal decisio ial review by the jurisdiction Rule 3(3)(ii) of the Indian rity) Rules, 1988, provides th ear of allotment of a promote d to the year for which the Sel o prepare the select list on the nted, together with the prescr onferring such entitlement. Th e examined on the basis of th facts of his case, rather than b echanically. egarding the treatment of h eless, parity with other officer stablishing that the relevan s permit the same benefit. Th ers figuring below the applican be ignored, and the applican xamination of the applicabl whether the applicant mu nt. not confined to interpreting th lso examine their constitutiona ns laid down by the Hon’bl andmark Seven Judges Benc a Kumar v. Union of Indi udge Constitution Bench hel of those statutory provision that it is authorized t ate legislation, including rule cannot declare its own paren unal Act and its rules ons on vires remain subject t nal High Court. Police Service (Regulation o he framework for determinin e officer. The determination lection Committee meeting wa e basis of which the officer wa ribed weightage for qualifyin he he by is rs nt he nt nt le st he al le ch ia ld ns to s. nt s) to of ng is as as ng Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

contin restric permis Conse referen year in of all figure list of

4.11. declar uncon few m the ap Theref with t applic applie (Appo Decem comm regula appro

(1) or

(2) wh the pr Select period decide nuous service in the State Po cts the assignment of a year ssible by reference to the relev equently, the year of allotment nce to the applicant’s State n which his name was first pro otment assigned to officers d below him but appointed o f 2017. In the applicant’s case, h ration that his inclusion in nditional and final. But if the more years as described in sce pplicant would not have even b fore, the rejection of the appli the obligation of the compete cable statutory formula and re ed in a purposive manner.T ointment by Promotion) Regula "7(4) The Select List shall rem mber of the year in which ittee was held with a view t ation (1) of regulation 5 or up val of the select list by the Co r as the case may be, finally a hichever is later. Provided that where the Stat roposal to declare a provisio t List as "unconditional", to d when the select list was in e the matter within a period o olice Service. The proviso als of allotment earlier than tha vant senior officers. t cannot be determined withou Police Service entry date, th ovisionally included, or the yea who were junior to him an on the basis of an earlier selec his appointment followed th the Select List of 2022 wa trial would have continued fo nario II above in Para 4.4 the been considered. icant’s claim does not dispens ent authority to ensure that th estrictions have been correctl The Regulation 7(4) of IP ations, 1955 provides that: main in force till 31st day of th the meeting of the selectio to prepare the list under sub pto sixty days from the date o ommission under sub-regulatio approved under sub-regulatio te Government has forwarde onally included officer in th o the Commission during th force, (the Commission sha of forty five days) or before th so at ut he ar nd ct he as or en se he ly PS he on b- of on on ed he he all he Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

date o earlier provis and f consid such a it was The pr list ha therein the re uncon select envisa

4.12. legal inclus 2017 s no oth 4.13 T govern the I Regul Police Regul prescr and p officer inclus also co in forc of meeting of the next selec r and if the Commission d sionally included officer in th final, the appointment of th dered by the Central govern appointment shall not be inva made after the Select List cea roviso to Rule 7(4) contempla as ceased to be in force in n.The only question is the ju espondents about not declaring nditional while provisionally list of 2017, considering aged in Para 4.4 above. In view of the foregoing dis basis on the material placed ion of the applicant as unco subject only to clearance in cr her impediment in his promotio The appointment of State Polic ned by the Indian Police Serv Indian Police Service (A ations, 1955, and the senior e Service (Regulation of Senior ation 7(4) of the Appointme ribes the period during which provides for the consideration r’s case where the requisit ion is forwarded during the p ontemplates appointment after ce in the circumstances specifi ction committee, whichever i declares the inclusion of th he Select List as unconditiona e Concerned officer shall b ment under regulation 9 an alid merely for the reason tha ased to be in force”. ates appointment after the selec n the circumstances specifie ustification for the decision o g the inclusion of applicant a including the applicant in th g the possible scenarios a scussion, we find no sufficien d before us to justify the non nditional in the Select List o riminal proceedings if there wa on. ce Service officers to the IPS vice (Recruitment) Rules, 1954 Appointment by Promotion rity is decided by the India rity) Rules, 1988. ent by Promotion Regulation h a select list remains in forc n of a provisionally include te proposal for unconditiona prescribed period. The provis r the select list has ceased to b ied therein. is he al be nd at ct ed of as he as nt n- of as is 4, n) an ns ce ed al so be Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

Rule conne which servic (Regu time to “3(3) after t

(i) the follow

(ii) T determ the Co basis o regard Police Police immed theCo on th follow

(a) for be giv of serv

(b) H compl years, years. Explan this cl Provi earlie senior the ba

3(3)(ii) of the IPS (Regulati cts the year of allotment to h the officer was appointed, e weightage and seniority ulation of Seniority) Rules, 198 o time reads as follows: The year of allotment of an o thecommencement of these rule e year of allotment of a direct wing theyear in which the comp The year of allotment of a mined withreference to the [y ommittee to makeselection, to of which he was appointedto d to the continuous service e Service not below the rank e or equivalent, upto the 31s diately before the [year f ommittee to make selection wa ebasis of which he was app wing manner:- r the service rendered by him ven a weightage of one year fo vice, subject to a minimum of f He shall also be given a wei leted two years of service bey referred to in sub-clause (a),

nation: For the purpose of c lause ,fractions, if any, are to b ided that he shall not be a er than the year of allotm r to him in that select list or asis of an earlier select list.”

ion of Seniority) Rules, 1988 the select list on the basis o together with the prescribe restrictions. Therelevant IP 88 amended subsequently from officer appointed to the servic es shall be as follows: - recruit officer shall be the yea petitive examination was held: a promotee officer shall b year for which] the meeting o o prepare the Select List on th the Service, was held and wit renderedby him in the Stat of a DeputySuperintendent o st day of December ofthe yea for which] the meeting o as held to prepare the select lis pointed to the Service, in th upto twenty one years, he sha for every completed three year four years: ightage of one year for ever yond the period of twenty on subject to a maximum of thre calculation of weightage unde be ignored. assigned a year of allotmen ment assigned to an office r appointed to the service o ” 8, of ed PS m ce ar

be of he th te of ar of st he all rs ry ne ee er nt er on Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

The st inclus necess of fai irrever procee an un emerg will b list of inclus eligibl the cr being 2017. There interpr of this “(ii) T determ meeti Select Servic In the deserv includ induct and th acquit List w now?

tatutory scheme, therefore, dis ion in a select list and th sary for appointment. This arg irness in public employment rsible loss of a career opport edings, which ultimately end i nusually long period beyond ges from the above rule is tha be appointed to IPS after bein f a particular year. When the ion in IPS against the selec le and recommended for appo riminal proceedings. Rule 3( considered for appointment was only one impediment retation of the rule by the resp s rule that is as follows: The year of allotment of a mined with reference to ing of the Committee to ma t List on the basis of whic ce”, e context of the present case o ves express consideration. Th ded in successive IPS Select L tion could not be finalised w he requisite integrity clearance tted on 2 February 2024, and h was subsequently declared u Why not earlier? What wa stinguishes between provisiona he completion of the proces gument raises a substantial issu : should an officer suffer th tunity merely because crimina in acquittal, remain pending fo d his control? The issue tha at a State Police Service office ng considered against the selec e applicant was considered fo ct list of 2017 he was foun intment but for the clearance i

(3) (ii) did not bar him from t against the select list of yea in the form of a mechanisti pondents by highlighting a pa a promotee officer shall b the [year for which] th ake selection, to prepare th ch he was appointed to th of the applicant, this argumen he applicant was provisionall Lists from 2017 to 2022, but h while the criminal proceeding e remained unresolved. He wa his inclusion in the 2022 Selec unconditional and final. Wh as the fault of the applicant al ss ue he al or at er ct or nd in m ar ic art be he he he nt ly is gs as ct hy if Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA

the tr prolon There agains promo correc Rule o his sen

4.14. I that th select pende requis pende is no grieva

5. In preced allowe The c applic officer place should of cer of.

6. The

(Kuma Me

mks rial continued for long per nged trial that ultimately result efore, there is no justification f st the select list of 2022 instea oted and allotted year of allotm ct purposive interpretation of of mischief that ensures the se niority for no fault of his. In the present case, the materi he applicant’s name remained lists despite there being n ncy of the criminal proceed site Integrity Certificate. As d ncy cannot be attributed to the reason for his suffering on ance regarding the treatment of view of the discussion and ding Para 4 and its sub-para ed in the following terms of th concerned respondent authori cant the year of allotment 2012 rs immediately below him in him above his junior in the se d be completed within three m rtified copy of this order. Pen ere shall be no order as to costs ar Rajesh Chandra) (Justi ember (A)

riod?Was he at fault for thi ted in his acquittal? for considering his appointmen ad of 2017 when his juniors go ment to IPS as 2012. This is th the rule that also conforms t enior should not be deprived o ial placed before us establishe d provisional in the successiv no impediment other than th dings and the absence of th discussed in details above, thi e conduct of applicant and ther n this account.The applicant f his juniors cannot be ignored d analysis above especially i as, the Original Application he relief claimed in Para 8(3). ities are directed to grant th 2 which has been granted to th n the Select List of 2017 an elect list of 2017. This exercis months from the date of receip nding MAs also stand dispose s. ice Narendra Kumar Johari) Member(J) is nt ot he to of es ve he he is re ’s d. in is he he nd se pt ed Digitally signed by MANORANJ AN KUMAR SINHA MANOR ANJAN KUMAR SINHA