Case: Sharad Singhal, IPS Vs Union of India and (UOI) Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

JudgesV.K. Bali, J. (Chairman) and L.K. Joshi, Vice Chairman (A)
IssueService Law
Citation2009 (2) SLJ 133 (CAT)
Judgement DateMay 28, 2008
CourtCentral Administrative Tribunal

Order:

L.K. Joshi, Vice Chairman (A), (Principal Bench, New Delhi)

  1. In this judgment, we are disposing off O.A. number 577/2008 and O.A. number 81/2008 because the question of law involved in both the cases in the same. Mr. Sharad Singhal, the applicant in O.A. number 577/2008 is an Indian Police Service (IPS) officer of Gujarat Cadre, selected on the basis of Civil Services Examination (CSE), 2005 and belonging to the 2006 batch of the IPS. He again appeared in the CSE of 2006 and again selected for IPS of 2007 batch. The applicant in the aforesaid O.A. belongs to Haryana. He has secured 64th position in the list of IPS officers of CSE, 2006, which is the top position for the State of Haryana to which he belongs. He is, therefore, confident that in the allocation of cadre for the IPS officers of 2007 batch, he would, in all probability, be allocated Haryana Cadre, which is his home cadre. Under Rule 3(1) of the Indian Police Service (Probation) Rules, 1954 (hereinafter Probation Rules), every person recruited to the service is appointed on probation for a period to two years and as per Rule 3-A, a person on satisfactory completion of the period of probation, is confirmed to the service after two years subject to other provisions of the Probation Rules. Rule 5 of the Probation Rules provides for training of officers selected for the IPS as a result of competitive examination. A probationer has to attend a foundation course at the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie and then further professional training at Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel National Police Academy (hereinafter SVPNPA). Thereafter the probationer has to undergo further training in the State to which he is posted. Mr. Sharad Singhal, applicant in O.A. number 577/2008 underwent the training for foundation course at the National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie after his selection in CSE, 2005 and thereafter proceeded for training to SVPNPA. At the time of filing the O.A., the applicant was still undergoing training following CSE, 2005. After his selection for IPS as a result of CSE, 2006, the applicant (Mr. Sharad Singhal) applied for exemption from attending training course at SVPNPA, Hyderabad. The request of the applicant was turned down by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) by its letter dated 4.12.2007 (Annexure A-1) addressed to the Director, SVPNPA. By memorandum dated 8.12.2007, the SVPNPA informed the applicant that the MHA had rejected his representation dated 22.08.2007 seeking exemption from undergoing basic training at the Academy along with IPS probationers of CSE, 2006. It was further mentioned in the communication that in case he decided to accept the offer of appointment to IPS issued to him by the MHA, he should report at the SVPNPA latest by the evening of December 9, 2007 for undergoing basic training course for IPS probationers of CSE, 2006 with effect from 10.12.2007. The memorandum further made it clear that late joining for the basic course would not be allowed. The applicant (Mr. Sharad Singhal) had meanwhile made another representation dated 26.09.2007 to the Secretary, MHA reiterating his request for exemption from the training. He had tried to draw support for his request for exemption from training from the OM dated 27.07.2007 of the Department of Personnel and Training (DoP&T), which had communicated the decision that the probationers who had already done the foundation course at Mussoorie Academy earlier would not be required to undergo the foundation course again upon selection to a service on the basis of another CSE. There was a flurry of representations from the applicant dated 12.11.2007, 12.12.2007, 17.12.2007 and 23.02.2008 with the request for reconsideration of his representation about exemption from training with 2007 batch of IPS. This O.A. has been filed assailing the communication dated 4.12.2007 from MHA to the Director, SVPNPA and memorandum dated 8.12.2007 from SYPNPA to the applicant informing him that this representation had been rejected. The following reliefs have been sought:

  2. Respondents may be directed to grant exemption from Basic Training Course at Hyderabad (basic course in 60 RR) in the year 2007-2008 to the applicant.

  3. In the alternative the respondents may be directed to allow the applicant to join Basic Training at Hyderabad to do the basic course (60 RR) in 2007 batch late or next batch.

  4. The respondents be directed not to cancel the candidature/selection of the applicant as IPS.

  5. In O.A. 81/2008, the applicant is Mr. Pankaj Nain, who has been selected for IPS in the CSE, 2006 i.e. 2007 batch. He had secured 88th position in the CSE, 2006. He was number 2 among those who were selected for IPS from Haryana. It may be recalled that applicant in O.A. 577/2008 is number 1 in the IPS from Haryana. If Mr. Sharad Singhal (applicant in O.A. 577/2008) is eliminated from the 2007 batch of IPS, the applicant (Mr. Pankaj Nain) should be holder of first position from Haryana State for IPS and would stand a very good chance of allotment of Haryana Cadre. He has taken serious exception to the fact that in spite of the training course for IPS officers of 2007 batch staring at SVPNPA from 10.12.2007, the applicant in O.A. 577/2008 (6th respondent in O.A. 81/2008) has not joined the training and in spite of this delay his candidature has not been cancelled for the 2007 batch. The applicant states that he is prejudiced by the inaction of the authorities in not canceling the candidature of the 6th respondent for the 2007 batch of IPS. The following reliefs have been sought:

    (a) Cancel the candidature of respondent No. 6 for allocation of a cadre post in the Indian Police Service for the 2007 Batch; and

    (b) Pass any such further or other orders that his Hon' ble Tribunal may deem fit in the interest of justice.

  6. Before considering the submissions made in the case by the learned Counsel, we may mention the Rules, which would be necessary for resolving the issue involved in the aforesaid O.As. According to Rule 4(1) of the Indian Police Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1954 (Recruitment Rules), recruitment to the IPS is made by one of the following methods:

    (a) by a competitive examination;

    (b) by selection from persons among the Emergency Commissioned Officers and Short Service Commissioned Officers of the Armed Forces; and

    (c) by promotion from the State Police Service.

    According to...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT