Raj Kumar Walia vs HOME AFFAIRS on 29 October 2026

O R D E R

PER: MR. SURESH KUMAR BATRA, MEMBER (J)

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

i) Quash the notification No.1-14011/07/2026-IPS.(E)(1) dated 21.05.2026 (Annexure A-5) issued by the Respondent no. 1 to the extent that the name of the applicant has not been included therein qua vacancies of 2022 (Select List 2022) whereas in select list for the year 2022 which has been prepared by the selection committee on 21.05.2026, the name of the Applicant stand at serial No.2 against the available vacancies, 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 versus UOI and others decided on 16.10.2014 and other judgments rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal as detailed in body of O.A.

ii) Issuance of appropriate orders or directions to the respondents to issue corrigendum to the notification dated 21.05.2026 (Annexure A-

5) or issue fresh notification so as to include the name of the applicant at its appropriate place i.e. serial No.2 in terms of select list prepared by the Selection Committee and to offer him appointment to the post of Indian Police Service w.e.f. due date with all the consequential benefits, being selected for the select list of 2022, in view of the orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as orders passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal wherein the Hon'ble tribunal held that "the retirement of the applicant from state service will not preclude the respondents from considering the applicant for selection and appointment to the Indian Police Service" being illegal, arbitrary and liable to be set-aside. iii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to consider and decide the representation dated 10.06.2026 submitted by the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law, keeping in view the recommendations of the Selection Committee, Recommendation made by the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, Government of Haryana, and the judicial precedents relied upon by the applicant. iv) Issue an appropriate order or direction directing the respondents to grant the applicant all consequential benefits flowing from such appointment, including fixation of seniority, notional pay fixation and all other service benefits admissible under the applicable rules.

2. Briefly stated factual matrix leading to filing the present Original Application, as per the applicant, is that the applicant

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

3. was initially appointed as Assistant Sub Inspector on 26.02.1990 and promoted as Sub Inspector on 10.11.1998, Inspector on 21.09.2004, Deputy Superintendent of Police on 19.02.2010 and Additional Superintendent of Police on 04.03.2021 respectively. Vide order dated 13.09.2019, the applicant was confirmed to the post of DSP w.e.f. 01.04.2012 (Annexure A/1). The applicant was substantive in the State Police Service and had completed the statutory requirement of eight years of continuous service in the post of Deputy Superintendent Post as required under the Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955. The applicant was also below the age of 54 as on 01.01.2022 being born on 13.01.1968, thereby meeting all the eligibility criteria prescribed for consideration for promotion to IPS.

4. The recruitment and conditions of service relating to members of All India Services are governed by the All India Services Act, 1951. Section 3 of the aforesaid Act confers power on the Central Government to frame rules and regulations regarding the recruitment and conditions of service of members appointed to an All India Service. In pursuance of the said provision, the Central Government framed the Indian Police Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1954 (Annexure A/2), wherein Rule 4 defines the method of recruitment and rule 9 stipulated recruitment by promotion. A bare reading of the aforesaid

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

rules clearly shows that the Central Government may make regulations for promotion to All India Services. The Central Government in exercise of power conferred in Rule 9(1) of The Indian Police Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1954, framed “The Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955” for promotion to the posts of Indian Police Services. It is submitted that, as per the mandate of Regulation 5 of the Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955, a select list of members suitable for promotion is to be prepared every year. Furthermore, if a meeting cannot be held during a particular year, a separate select list must be prepared for each year during which Committee failed to meet, as on 31st December of that year. In other words, if no meeting is held during a given year for any reason, the Selection Committee, upon convening subsequently, is mandated to draw up separate select lists for each respective year (Annexure A-3). However, due to unexplained delay, no select list was prepared for the year 2020 onwards

5. Now the respondent No.3 i.e. the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of Haryana, Home Department, submitted proposals for select lists for the years 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025, respectively. Break up of vacancies available is detailed below:-

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

Select List No. of vacancies

6. The aforesaid fact may also be substantiated from the notification dated 21.05.2026. According to applicant, the select list for the years 2020 to 2025 could not be prepared by the Respondents and no meeting of the committee was held. Resultantly, the appointment of the applicant to the post of IPS (who is in the zone of consideration) has been delayed. The meeting of the selection committee/ Departmental Promotion Committee was held on 28.04.2026 wherein the year wise list from 2020 upto 2025 has been prepared and recommended for appointment of the members to the post of Indian Police Service. The case of applicant has also been placed before the Selection Committee for promotion to the IPS for the select year 2022 and found suitable/eligible for the select list of 2022. The applicant has stated that his name is categorically mentioned at Sr. no. 2 of the Select list for the year 2022 and the case of applicant has also been placed before the Selection Committee for promotion to the IPS for the year 2022 and there are 04 vacancies as per select list for the year 2022, the respondent no. 1 in exercise of the provisions contained in sub regulation (3) of Regulation 7 of

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

the Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955, had issued a notification dated 21.05.2026 wherein it has been stated that the Public Service Commission, on 14.05.2026, has approved the Select Lists of the years 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025 prepared by the Selection Committee in its meeting held on 28.04.2026, containing the name of applicant for filing up the post of IPS (Annexure A-4). It is further stated that Respondent No.1 on the very same date had also issued another notification dated 21.05.2026 whereby certain members of State Police Service of Haryana have been appointed to the Indian Police Service, which shows that the same has been issued for the year 2020 upto 2025, however the name of applicant in an illegal and arbitrary manner excluded for appointment to the post of Indian Police Service.

7. It is further submitted that the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, has appointed only 3 incumbents to the post of IPS despite there being 4 vacancies, even though the applicant is fully eligible and his name has been approved by the UPSC (Annexure A/5). It is pleaded that a perusal of the notification clearly shows that the respondents, in an illegal and arbitrary manner, appointed only 3 persons from the select list of 2022, notwithstanding the fact that 4 vacancies were determined for the said list. When the applicant inquired

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

about the exclusion of his name, the respondents informed him that it was solely on the ground of his retirement on 31.01.2026, despite his name having been duly included in the select list for the year 2022. The applicant contends that the select lists for the years 2020 to 2025 could not be prepared due to delay on the part of the respondents. Had the select lists been prepared in 2022. The applicant would have been appointed in that very year. The applicant, upon attaining the age of 58 years, superannuated from service on 31.01.2026 (Annexure A/7) after serving for more than 35 years and fulfils all the requisite conditions for appointment to the Indian Police Service.

8. The applicant has relied upon various case laws including the decision of this Tribunal dated 17.08.2026 in the case of Suresh Kumar vs. UOI (O.A. No.779/2026) and Virender Singh vs. UOI & Ors. (O.A. No.778/2026).

9. Respondent No.1 has filed written statement contending that neither the Regulations nor any other statutory instrument vests the Central Government, or answering respondent, with the power to appoint a retired State Police Service officer to the IPS. To grant the relief prayed for, would require the respondents to act in direct contravention of the mandatory mandate of Regulation 9(1), which is legally impermissible. It is further stated that mere administrative delay, if any, in

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

convening the Selection Committee Meeting or finalizing the Select List, which in any event denied and is attributable to the process undertaken by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) under Regulation 5, cannot operate to override, dilute or relax an express and mandatory statutory requirement. The applicant cannot claim appointment in derogation of Regulation 9(1) merely on the speculative ground that had the process been completed earlier, he would have been appointed while still in service. That selection and appointment are well-settled to be distinct and independent legal concepts. It is a settled legal position that inclusion of a candidate's name in a select panel/list does not, by itself, create any vested, accrued or enforceable right to appointment unless the governing statutory provisions expressly so provide. In the present case, the Regulations expressly prescribe the conditions subject to which appointment may be made, and it is admitted that the applicant does not satisfy the said conditions as on the date of appointment. It is further submitted that the applicant had earlier submitted a representation dated 02.06.2026 through the State Government of Haryana seeking appointment to the IPS notwithstanding his retirement, which was duly examined by the answering respondent and rejected vide letter dated 15.06.2026 on the ground that the same was not admissible

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

under Regulation 9(1) of the Regulations. The subsequent representation dated 10.06.2026 relied upon by the applicant merely reiterated the same issues and claims which already stood examined and rejected, and does not constitute any fresh cause of action nor does it disclose any inaction on the part of the answering respondent. The judgments and precedents relied upon by the applicant, including the cases of Shri Parambir Singh Parmar and Shri Harjit Singh, are clearly distinguishable on facts and are of no assistance to the applicant's case. The appointments in the said cases were made by the Central Government solely in compliance with specific, binding directions issued by the competent judicial forum in the facts of those individual cases, and not in exercise of any independent power to relax or dispense with Regulation 9(1). In the present case, no such direction of any competent forum exists, and hence no parity can be claimed. Further, the applicant's reliance upon instances of appointment to the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) after retirement, including the cases of Shri Amar Deep Singh, Dr. Subhita Dhaka and Ms. Ashima Sangwan, is misconceived and irrelevant, inasmuch as the answering respondent is the cadre-controlling authority only qua the IPS and has no knowledge of, or competence to comment upon, appointments made to any other All India Service.

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

10. The entire process relating to the convening of the Selection Committee Meeting, the preparation of year-wise select lists, and the assessment of eligible officers is undertaken within a statutory framework involving the State Government, the UPSC, and the Central Government. Therefore, the allegation that the answering respondent failed to convene the Selection Committee Meeting or delayed the preparation of the select lists is factually incorrect and denied. Be that as it may, the applicant was duly considered by the Selection Committee in its meeting held on 28.04.2026 and was found fit for inclusion at Serial No. 2 in the Select List of 2022. Thus, the applicant's right to be considered against the vacancies of Select List 2022 was fully protected and no prejudice was caused to him in the matter of consideration. Appointment to the IPS is governed by Regulation 9(1) of the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955, which permits appointment only of a person, who is a member of the State Police Service on the date of appointment. Admittedly, the applicant had retired from the Haryana Police Service prior to issuance of the appointment notification dated 21.05.2026 and had consequently ceased to be a member of the State Police Service. Therefore, irrespective of the circumstances leading to preparation of the Select Lists, the applicant did not satisfy the mandatory statutory requirement prescribed under

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

Regulation 9(1) on the date of appointment and could not have been appointed to the IPS. It is submitted that 4 vacancies were determined for Select List 2022 and that the applicant was included at Serial No. 2 of the said Select List upon being found fit by the Selection Committee. It is submitted that inclusion in the Select List only renders an officer eligible for consideration for appointment and does not confer any vested, accrued or indefeasible right to appointment. The contention that the respondents were legally bound to appoint the applicant on the basis of the recommendation of the Selection Committee or that any legitimate expectation accrued in his favour is denied. No principle of legitimate expectation can operate against an express statutory provision. Accordingly, the applicant's non- inclusion in the appointment notification dated 21.05.2026 was strictly in accordance with the provisions of the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 and does not suffer from any illegality or arbitrariness.

11. Respondent No.2 (UPSC) has filed written statement submitting therein that that the Selection Committee Meeting (SCM) for preparation of the year-wise Select Lists of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025 for promotion of State Police Service (SPS) officers to the IPS of Haryana Cadre against 05, 04, 04, 01, 03 and 04 vacancies respectively, was

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

held on 28.04.2026 at Chandigarh. The name of the applicant was first considered for inclusion in the Select List of 2020 and 2021 at S. No. 13 and 7 respectively in the zone of consideration against 05 and 04 vacancies. The Selection Committee examined his service records for the preceding five years and on the basis of his overall service records, assessed him as 'Very Good'. However, the name of the applicant was not recommended for inclusion in the Select List of 2020 and 2021 due to statutory size of the Select List and availability of the eligible senior officers with 'Very Good' grading. The Selection Committee examined his service records for the preceding five years upto the year 2021-22 and on the basis of his overall service records, assessed him as 'Very Good' and the name of the applicant was recommended for inclusion in the Select List of 2022 at S. No. 2. The Commission approved the recommendations of the Selection Committee on 14.05.2026 in accordance with the observations received from the State Government and the Central Government in terms of Regulation 6 and 6-A of the Promotion Regulations and subsequently the same was acted upon by the Central Government, Ministry of Home Affairs by issuing Notifications in the Gazette of India vide No.1-14011/07/2026-IPS-I (E)(I) dated 21.05.2026 regarding approval of the year-wise Select Lists, wherein the name of the applicant was mentioned as

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

'Retired from Haryana Police Service' and further notification No.I-14011/07/2026-IPS-I (E)(II) dated 21.05.2026 regarding appointment of SPS officers to the IPS of Haryana Cadre, wherein the name of the applicant was not mentioned. It is further stated that there is no role of the Commission in appointment of recommended officers in their respective state cadre. Appointment of State Police Service officer to the IPS, is the exclusive domain of the Central Government. It is also contended that no action on their part has been challenged.

12. Respondent No.3 has filed a short reply stating that the applicant has challenged the notification dated 21.05.2026 (Annexure A-5) issued by Respondent No.1, and that the other reliefs sought relate to Respondents No.1 and 2. Consequently, they are the competent authorities in the matter, and no action of Respondent No. 3 is under challenge, nor is any specific relief sought against them. Thus, Respondent No. 3 has no active role and thereby prayed for dismissal of OA qua respondent No.3.

13. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined material on record as well as case law cited by both the sides. The issue for consideration herein is as to whether the claim of the applicant is legally sustainable.

14. During the course of arguments, the applicant has drawn our attention to the decision of the Tribunal dated 17.08.2026 in

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

O.As No.778/2026 and 779/2026. He submits that the controversy involved is squarely and conclusively covered by aforesaid decision of this Tribunal. The applicant is similarly situated person like applicants in the aforesaid OAs. They were also member of Haryana Police Service and they were included in the select list of 2020 and like applicant (herein) their candidature was also not considered for appointment by promotion to the post of IPS on the ground that they had retired from Haryana Police Service. Applicant’s name is also figured along with them in notification dated 21.05.2026 (Annexure A/4) for the select list 2022.

15. This Bench vide decision dated 17.08.2026 placing reliance on various judicial pronouncements including decision dated 15.10.2025 of this Bench in O.A. No.557/2024 allowed OAs with direction as under:- “21. In the present case, when the selection process for induction to IPS cadre from SPS officers was commenced, the applicant was within range of consideration as is evident from the list of names (Annexure A-1) of recommended candidates for induction into 9 IPS against the vacancies of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025. The name of applicant in Ministry of Home Affairs notification dated 21.05.2026 appeared with remark 'Retired from Haryana Police Service'.

22. Considering the law settled on the issue, as cited hereinabove, we are of the view that the action of the respondents in not including applicant's name for appointment to the IPS cadre, despite having been in the Select List, only on the ground that the applicant has 'Retired from Haryana Police Service, is illegal.

23. In view of the above discussion, we find me Application and direct the respondents to include the name of the applicant for induction into IPS and accordingly issue order of his induction into IPS. The applicant will be deemed to have been notionally appointed to IPS on the due date with reference to the panel for

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

the year 2020. The intervening period between his superannuation from State service and his appointment in IPS shall be considered as continuing in service, subject to vigilance clearance and, other formalities. He will continue in service till he reaches the age of superannuation prescribed for IPS Officers. The action shall be completed within four weeks' from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order by the respondents. The Original Application stands allowed. Pending MA, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.” Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that respondents have complied with direction in the aforesaid two OAs and applicants therein have been appointed to the IPS vide notification dated 24.08.2026. A copy thereof is placed on record.

16. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the fact and circumstances of the case and gone through the judicial pronouncements. All the contentions raised by the respondents in opposition to the claim of the applicant have already been dealt with and adjudicated by this Tribunal in decision dated 15.10.2025 in O.A. No.557/2024. Therefore, there is no occasion for us to re-examine the already settled issue. In view of the aforesaid, applicant is also entitled to get same benefit as has been granted to the applicants in the aforesaid OAs.

17. In view of the above discussion, we find merit in the Original Application and direct the respondents to include the name of the applicant for induction into IPS and accordingly issue order of his induction into IPS. The applicant will be deemed

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI

to have been notionally appointed to IPS on the due date with reference to the panel for the year 2022. The intervening period between his superannuation from State service and his appointment in IPS shall be considered as continuing in service, subject to vigilance clearance and, other formalities. He will continue in service till he reached the age of superannuation prescribed for IPS Officers. The action shall be completed within four weeks' from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order by the respondents.

18. The Original Application stands allowed. Pending MA, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.

(RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI) (SURESH KUMAR BATRA) MEMBER (A)

MEMBER (J)

/kr/

Location: Date: 2026.11.05 12:45:21+05'30' KAMLA DEVI