Central Administrative Tribunal - Gauhati
Sh K Nagaraj Ips vs M/O Home Affairs on 5 April, 2019
TIVE TRIBUNAL HAT BENCH lication: 9. 041/00311 {2018 "Bate of Decisk ion: Ob0U- 20 ae SLE MRS. MANJULA DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER DN'BLE MR. N. NEIHSIAL, ADMINISTRATIVE. MEMBER | | Sri K. NAGARAI, IPS Son of Sr K. Subramanyam:
Aged about 59 years 7 Res! ident of - Annexe. NOL dé, Circuit House
-Kunjaban, Agartala. 799006.
& Permanent R/o. Plat No. 81 » Noveninnan Nager, Road No. fi, Jubilee Hil, Hyderabad ~ 500076. sad adi agate voeeApplicant By Advocates: Mr J, Roy & » Mr. S. shar titi
--Wersus-
r, Union of india -
Represented by the Secretary .
Goverment of lndia..
Ministry of Home Affairs © North. Block, New Delhi. - 1 1000) . 2, The Home Secietary Goverment of Indio New Delhi- oe "1 10601.
3. the under Secretary © _ Government of India -
_ Ministry of Home Affairs North Block, New Delhi 4 000).
AL the Secretary | _ Government of india * Minisiry-of Personnet: Public, Grie ances & Pensions Department of Pérsonnel oe Training » . North Block, New Delhi: ~ TIOOOT J State OF tioura . aa Represented by. Chief Secietary _ Governmentof Trhourd:.
Agartala - 799010 7 Addit ional 'Se Govern ith the order dated 08.06.2018 Issued by the Additional Se re the Government of Tripura whereby they cancelled ihe a 'motion -granted to the applicant vide"
order dated 16. W 20 015 and 30.12.2018 and reverted the applicant to the pos of i for General Police (IGP), Tipura, the 1 before: this Tribunal under section " of ihe ; applicant approach Administrative Tour the respondents, raore | 'saneuiind 7 a | _ No, § to set oxide /quchiconcel vo ernment of Tripura.
- The.
com tow we -_ A Bai respondents Sui ate ofe sligibil iy to the pettfoner i es, Seog Additional DGP, DGP & DGP oO direct the respondents to release all due salary to the pelifloner and consider. the grant | of leave as per entitlement.
To reguiarse the 'petiod of suspension and = rajaase af inctements, medals etc. as per. eligibility.
8.vi To pass any cine order/orders as Your Lordship may think fit and, proper, .
8 Cost of this septeaton . 2, . The. brief facts arated by the appicant are thaf. the. appicant joined in the Indian Police Service HPS) in the year 1983 as
- cr 3 direct rectuit.and was allotied | ta, Funct ion at Tripura. in fhe month of September 1986 the appl cant was promoted fo ine post of Additional Superintendent Of Police and posied in west district, 4 ipura. Thereafter, on 19. 05.1987 ine 'applicant was promoted fo the post oF Superintendent oF Police. and posted in the North Tripura . District
3. From' August 1990 to Jay 1991, the applicant served as _ Superintendent of Police CID, Andro Pradesh. During November me 1991 to November 1995, the appl icant proceeded on Central Deputation with the 'Government | of india and functioned as a Principal, Central Detective Training School, Hyderabad, -es specialised training facility for Scientific and Advance techniqués of investigation : Inspector General of Police {law and yon} the Goverriment of Tripura issued applicant that he became eligible to be Additional Director General of Police tor General of Police (HAGt scale as with Mr. 8, Sorma learned counsel xpplicant, Mr. R, Hazerika, leaned Addl. dents No.1, 2,3 & 4and Mr. $. Dutt, .
he respondents No. 5, 6&7, Oo from inspector of General Police {IGP}. granted adhoc promot (per) with ted from ADGP to. GP Ti pura on ad: hoc bari in me. scale of IPS. Subsequent, on 30. 12. 2015, the applicant : 7 w 1S. promoted from Superti me scale to 0 Apex scale of IPS on ad- noc basi Thus. the appl icant served Os s DGP in- charge and as DGP.
Head of the Police Force for a period of NWO years nine months from 01 07: 2014 jo 10.04: 2017. On} 10.04 2017, the applicant relinquishes. | the inecharge o on DGP, Head of Police Force (HOPE) ond srocesded | on leave, Subsequent. on lst "may. 2018 the appli cant was . . a hansfered fo ie post ot Director Genera | Prisons, 2 a "tf bw submitted by ee counsel Mr. Roy that while the | applicant was: serving Cs: 'IGP CRPF, ot Hyderabad on 09. 02, 2008, a ot 7 . 'the cai Deth i unit filed an FIR under section IS (2) Rw 130 He ) of :
Prevention. of 'Corruption ACL 1988, cogainst the applicant for : ollegedly POssessi sing disproportionate assets and took ue he "investigation. 'Thereafter, immediately the 'applicant + was placed i t under suspension on 1 24, 03. 2005 which was s subsequently revoked on : . ne 0607 07.2016. On. revocation of suspension and repatriation. to: the: By : Government of Tripura: on, July, 2006 ine opp icant was posted as: slOP . :
vs [Armed Police) and later on. as IGP. (Administration), According te. a the leaned counsel, in. May. 2009. the Ministry OF: Home Alias, _ Government of | Indliar initiated Qa | departmental enquiry against the . applicant on the same: ollegati Ons evelies by CBI. ned counsel during ine. foe) as on ieted 26 orders of services Ine IPS the for | peing consideration for promot ion 0 er, "though he. Was duly considered | by meeting hell on 27.04.2014 but due fo eonda departmental inquiry initiated by promotion 'of the applica nt jo the nex! post Could not be cons d and was kept under seal cover, » ne . it was : omitted that as 'per opi nion of L | Department as w ded Advocate General ihe second 'Screening Comm eld on 25, 06.2014 to review - promotion against the applic 'post OF Addi oneal Director of Police . which was kept < o fer, AS per recommendation of ie sci Screening Commit: se, The overnment of Tripura vide noiificatio r = 7 _ :
= = mo 7 ne applicant fo hold the charge of temporary and ad- hoc basis due: to subramaniam: IPS, 12, 'of Tipura vide order dated 14.09.2014 promoted | the applicant fo rank of Additional Director. of Police, tripure Qn i hoc | Sais fo noid the: charge of Director General 7 of Police, the opp urther cllowed to drew ihe Apex scale. "of Rs, 80, 0001 w.e.f, 30.12.2015 on ad-hoe basis, According. to leamed counsel, acehoc. promotions. were: . ant 'offer cluly - Following the procedure as iaid given to thes Hon'ble. Apex Cour and also reiterated by Department --- nneland Training, Government of India.
4.
My. Roy by rtening Para é § of the pleadings, submitted : that for not being able: fo get Sri Kuldeep kumar IPS appointed: as BoP head of Police force in Apex scale, vengeful attitude of respondent No, 7 against the: applicant intensified same and ihe. came was is reflected in: remainder/D0 letter dated 22.05.2017, a 28, O06. 2017, 31 07. 201 17, 05. 09. 2O)7- andl OF. 11.2017 which were issued by Ministry of Home Affi for reversion of the applicant to. the: rank :
= on IGP. They have not given in ctedence that aic-hoc promotions | were issued fo the applicant after futling ail the pararneters of 7 | length of service, clean record and 'continuously performi ing | in the : field duties to the ful solisfaction of ine stafe of Goverment | 7 According fo the leaned counsel, be ing fully aware of the facts as : stated the respondent No. 7 targeted applicant to dept ve hi im of bis regulc at r promotions ever ad- noc promot on whict hare subject tothe . -
o4 outcome of the ctiminal/department proceeding, whi ch iS regu ; | course of action,
15. | Further sulomit ted by the leamed counsel even Govt. of | 7 Ripura processed the direct ions of Ministry of Home Affairs for the . submitted by feained co rom fhe case as devoid. of - merit.
made the representation dated Immediately, 18.01.2018 before the resp dent no. 2 anc-prayed for dropping of the Deporimental p procs Hh ag which was stiff pending for more than . s inifiated on the same allegation of | identical facts. Ho eve here: was no such response from ihe autharity.
17. it was submitie 7 learned counsel that vide impugned order dated 08, 06. 18 ie Addit ional Secretary Govt, of Tripura . cancelled ad-hoc pro ion granted fo the applicant on 16.09.2014, 26.12.20 Sand oi. 2015 and reverted the applicant to the post of IGP, Tripure in pay level 14 on IPS pay Rule, 2016. It was. ef that the sciid order was issued at the behest of responde ani Ne Hence, tis not sustdinable under the - low,
18. j the learned counsel for the applicant e ofder dated 08.06.2018; the appl icant . sentation on 25.06.2018 before Join} : Secretary Govt. of Tripura sand prayed. for cancellation of the.
oh amned counsel. further argued that departmental - ee eding iS: STH pending ond. therefore wi ithout any concrete resul 7 | Oly ding | issuance of | impugtied order dated: 08.06.2018. is. axbitory tlt egal ond mald- fide; hence, liable fo be interfered with.
: 20. -- _ According fo learned counsel for the: opp licant: app ficant | | = : | ! held the > post of BGP, Apex Scale s since 30. 12. 2075 i. e. about 2 years 8 months and therefore, action of. the respondents in. | reverting the . . a applicant fo the rank of AGP could not be legally. acceptable and . : therefore the impugned: dated 08 06 2018 | is liable to set aside. 2h ae was further. "submi ted. by leamed- 'counsel that 'the : 'applicant i is Sr. most officer | in pura cadre and also. served at the , tat level as. 'OGP, Head of Police roree for 2: years 7 moriths, cis oo aso resulted: 'in 'humiliation to himselt, "his family and welkwisher | ; bei de his colleagues, a _ Learned: counsel relied: the decis ion of vO! & Others WS : "OM. | Dated: VA, 09. 1992 in support ot 'his Contentions. 'Therefore | the K V. Jankiraman & Others reported | in 1191 4 scc 109 ond the opr . 18 learned submitied a ned order dated 08.06.2018 is liable to pe setoside and.
omitted thai the wct of respondents in Hon and reverting the apoticant to fhe the: provisions of service jurisprudence @. Atticle 311 (2) of the constitution of of principle of . nafural justice and 7 ct, 1988 against: the applicant isbyi K. Nagaray], IPS" {tr 1983 Batch} , the then DIG, CRPE, "Hyderabad, on on of holding assets clisproportionate 'te his income from k own ces, He was placed under suspension by jhe Ministry of Ho e vide order dated 24.03.2005 in terms of Rule 3(3) of the All In Hh ices (Discipline & Appeal) Rule; 1969, His ; suspension was + Vie ind: extended by the. Ministry of Home Affairs from time to time and finally revoked on 05.07.2006. _ _Leartie 'CGSC° further submitted that on of CBI, the Ministry of Home | Affairs vile order dated 28. 0. 2007 orded prosecution sanction against the ion of Coruption Act, 1988, AS advised a by CBI and the. Ceritral. Vigilance Commission, disciplinary "Glso-been initialed against fhe applicant by the | | proceedings hav , Affairs vide chargé-sheet dated 28.05.2009 in terms of ihe AIS (D RA} Rules, 1969.
: | 26. | I was submitted by Ade CGSC that $4 Kuldeep Kumar, 2 IPS. represented. to the Mini istry of Home Aitoi rg vide representation - doled 16.03. 2017 wilh a request to give promotion fo the post of | DGP in the state of Mpura on being repatriated tO Tripura siate from Central deputation in July 2016. the representation of Sn Kuldeep. kumar iPS was exarrined by the Mi instr of Home Affairs in the ight
- | of promotion guidelines issued oy the Mi inisiry of Home Alfairs vide letter deted 15, 1, 1999 for promotion of IPS officers. oe It was further submitted that the applicant, the then.DGP,. | Tipura had: been promoted by the state Government, iwice, from | the graces of IGP. fo ADGP and then from ADGP to DGP despite.of . : the fact eriminal and: aise! iplinary: proceedings were pending agains! . | him at the time of such promot ons, These proceed ings. were: also. | pending agai inst Shr: K Nagard, IPS when the representation of. Sri "Ku uideep kurnar was under consi ideration. : 28.00 at was further stated in the written statement that while | considering the representation of shi Kul deep Kumar, IPS the Ministry ; ;
"also noted thet the Government, of THpura, in. their letter dated : 26.06.2014 while seeking VIEWS of CBI for oromotion of the applicant ig However, the. . state: Government themselves promoted Shri K, | meantime, sceni to availability of of DGP. It was a
-orrimunications requested 7 ihe: State view in the matter and mon like to promotion. given level 14 of the IPS: (Poy Rules, 2016,
- : 30. 'The applicant Me. Nagaro} on acquittal by the CBI-Court, made C1 request FO. the: disciplinary authority io drop proceeding against him, However, the Ministry of Home Affairs decided not to "proceeding indicated against hirh: The competent authority also_ "governed by Rule 4 (1) (A) of the AlS (D&A) Rules 1949. well as Ministry: of: Home Affairs nave issued several comrnunications hot co-operate in | inquiry proceedings on one pretext or another, 43 29, H was further sidted in the written statement that as the the applicant were in violation of 'the IPS agree with the request made by the applicant to drop disciplinary decided that suspension period of the applicant may not be treated as periods spent on duty and his period would remain fo be 3}, _ According to learned counsel, the ad-hoc promotion to the pos of Addi. Director General. Pol ce was in violation of the promotion guidel ne issued by he Mi istry of Home Affairs vide letter ; . tiated 15,07.1999, it was further, (stated that the discipll proceeding is petiding for almost nine years and for the delay of ihe proceedings applicant hi mself | is responsi ble. The i inquiry authority as fo ihe applicant fo co- "operate in inquiry however, the applicant dic | 14 'According {6 learried counsel the order dated 08.06.2018 "issued by the Go ict restored ihe rule.
ne wiitien statement filed on behalf of ir. Dutta, learned counsel for the State of screening committee' was "held -on eir comments and the Minisiry of Home Be 7301 i4 had unambiguously clarified that ervants, ad- hoe promotion: were. not § officers as per IPS Promotion quide! ines such clear response from the Ministry. of Home 'Affairs, Ad-hoc | , h retrospective effect from 20.04.2010,
34. It was furthes omitted by the leamed counsél that | vroeeing ora mendation dated 21 04.2010 in respect sideration towards promotion to the of Police above Supertime Scale © (Addl nder sealed cover, was opened on fime a criminal and a dséiptinary concluded, the ad-hoc promotion Was iPS promotion guidelines.
Tripura thereby reverii ing ihe: opi cnt SO f the committee was forwarded to the - notion was given to the applicant with against the applicant and since the:
if wes submi ted byt the leamed counsel by referring para 35, (il) of the wi extended to ine applicant wrondly which was not permissible even.
oe : by the DoPT O.M. dated | 4.09.1992, The simple iiteral meaning of the © @cthoc promotion is that if fs purely temporary iN neture. so as to | address the current administrative exigency and thus if should not had been given to the applicant with retrospective effect, in fact, the screening committes in its meeting held on 25.06.2014 also did ; not recommend provi iding ad- hoc promotion to the. applicant retrospectively. since, Ane. ad hoc promotion per se is not permissible | i CCses of IPS offi icers as per para: 20 of the iPS Promotion guidelines, ihe subsequent ad- hoc promotions granted to the applicant after . : aforesaid promotion: to the. post of Addi fiona Director General of : Police (Adal. DGP, Tipura from the post Of Inspecior General of
- Police | IGP}, Tripura Viz to the post of Director General of Police | | (DGP) in above Supertime Scaie'on ad-hoc basis and to the post of . | Director Gerieral of Police (0G) in. 1 the Apex Scale of Rs. 80 000/- ; | fixed en "ack hoe basis were 'also | in violation of thie IPS Promotion : guidelines, thus, 'these' Ad-hoc promot on fo the post of DGP (Above superti me Scale) and fo the pos! of DGP [Apex Scale] are able to. | : be cancelled. ~
36... was subrhifted by ieamed counsel that there cannot be > | any further ad-hoc promotion provided fog Government servant 16 who has aiteady been e) : ided-an ad-hoc pramotion, but in the instant case, the crim inal « Case an the ¢ app icant, the efore ase > oF the app cant for promotion ¢ cannot
- be considered « cs e rp tion guidelines OF IPS,
38. ubmilfed that the state government received seve -ations frorn the Government of indi, veision of the applicant from the post ot promotion guideline icant was allowed acl: hoc: promotion ence, authori ity had fight to revetse ths promotion was illegal: not based on K.- Ghosh; learned Sele Cand Mr. S. Dutta. learned counsel for the fespondenis. | : (0.
17 The main eet arguments amonast others made by the | ine On ines Applicant dre that -- - aS 7 ae 7 So The impugned ore doted 08.06.2018 Le. (Annexure- Al) | was: ; issued legally. without any recommendation of any Screening Committee,
(i) The impugned order was issued in violation of principles of natural justice and adm) ristrative lr play and that foo without issul ingvany notice whatsoever or provi id Ing any: opportunity 'of being 7 heord.
. a 7 The» impugned order si in violation of established . procedure ond DoPt OM, dated: 14.09. 1992 and Apex Court ruling | reported in 991) 4 sec 109i Ink: ve Jankicaran, _ con - The. act Of respondents | in. cancelling ihe ad-hoc . promotion and reverting the applicani/pett tloner to the rank of IGP i is | in violation of the" provisi ions. "of service jurisprudence" and
- constitutional mandate | Le, Article 31 E {2} of constitution of India. 4, The appli icant | joined the. indicn' Police Service (IPS) in ine yea of 1983. Thereatter, he got the promotion as ent fled in July | 2006. While the applicant Was. posted as the Deputy Inspector . General, "CREE in Hydlerabee, he. was. s placed under suspension on | 24 O83, 2005 and the' suspension was" revi jiewed and extended by the 48 finally revoked on 05.07.2006. CBI had Minisiry of Home Affairs ar fied a charge she CC No. 6/2007 before the learned special Judge for CBI ease: derabad.
42. Admittedlly, 1 disciplinary proceeding was initialed"
¢ é Ministry of Horne Affairs vide charge erms of Rule 8 of the All india Service. lowing two article of charges:
agataj, IPS while. posted and working as ntral Detective Training School (CDTS), and Dy. Inspector General of Police, * from the period May, 1992 to July, ited «misconduct in violating Rule | 16 (4) of All India Service (AIS) Rules, by acquiring | and -- selling assets without prior knowledge of the and Non-intimation, thereafter. - .
(ii) jagaraj during the period 04,10.1978 to _ as been in possestion of "properties and violating Rule 3(1) of Als (Conduct) Rules."
43, Kumar, iPS "Itoure Cadre 1988, batch serving with Govemnme Tpura made a representation before the authority that thoug was eligible for promotion to. ihe grade of DGP, he hos been' without any Justified reason whereas in some cases the laie. government promoted officers as Director 19S.
'General/Additional . Director General --fhough there were | discipincry/court cases psnaiing « against them, as such, requested to"
"get promotion to ihe pos of DGP as well as aillow him ex pay in ihe pay Matix x level7). = 4A. | The said representation was examined by the Ministry of
- . Home Affai rs ine Aight of. promotion oul jidelines issued by the Ministry oF | Home. Alls vide letter dated 18.0. 1999 for promotion of iPS aa officers, Further slated that while considering the representation of :
7 Shri Kuldeep Kumar, IPS, the Mi nist also noted thatthe Goveitiment 7 | -- of Tripura, j ni their isiter dated 26. 06: 2014 whi le seeking | views of CBI _ fo promotion of the app ficant from the grade of | ip to ADGP, :
i clearly indicated therein that such promotion Was, to be. made on
- : purely ad+ hoc: basis. The state Government, in thelr letter. dated | 7 10.07.21 2014 'also inal cated. that the applicant was ihe senior riost ; avallobie off icer in. the state {at that ime) who right look otter the 7 'charge ¢ of DGP.as an inter mM measure.
| "45. ; The main contention vn irc is inat the state oo
- government at that time themselves, promoted the applicant from ; the grade. of ADGP. to. grade: DGP. in the prerevised Apex Seale oor" | with the. central goveinment and | in violation of the promotion > guid lines.
20 46, gical conclusion, we are in hand the promotion guide! died 15.01.1999 Issued by the. Ministry ve ment of india addressed fo all Chief con the subject of Indian Police or scale, senlor administrative. grade, scale and above superlime scale-
causes of the guidelines as hereunder:
20.1 As 'appointment of the 8 members of the Alf india Services to various grades _ is made on regutar basis, and the concept of one- _ ' time confirmation exists: --
intheir cases, the concept.
of grant of ad-hoc promotion f is alien to them. Unilké -Céntral Government: Servants, ad-hoc promotions aré not be allowed in their cases even. if the disciplinary cases/criminal- .
prosecutions inslituted against --
them are found to have. been prolonged."
a7. in the. 38 we nave noted that the 'applicant was given promofi onal Oi rector Gerieral of Poli ice, Tripura from IGP on 1609.2 20.04'2010 of pur from ADGP Tipu in supertime scale. vide letter dated ving promotion retrospectively wet --
-- and further ad-hoc. promotion: oh.
26, 12. 2016 and thet eat er trorn érfime. scale to Apex scale on
0. 2.2015: undisoutedly, the said ace hoc promotions were. given by 'petlod: when ihe' criminal and 'The state 'government during ihe aitiptinary proceedings Were. p ding, against the app plicant. AS. _ : such, we are of the view that the scid Lode "HOC promot ion Were given | -- by Yio lating ine promot ional gui idatir ne. dated 15.01. 1999, | More: $0, ine. cpplicont tailed to counter the valicity ok:
"sald scence {5,01 3999 :
48. | Now we are in anid DOPT OM. dated 14.07, 1992 as : narrated oy the. appl icant' s counsel int ris "arguments os wel We asi nihe : ple dings: made i in para. ie one & Tt 1S soil OM, is concerned with ihe promatio on of. "Government: servant - against. whom a oo discipl inaryycourt proceed ag are pending on whose conduct 1 under investigation. The Gover nent by faking. info of: KY.
: Janik iraman' 3 case reported in Al 991 SC2010 in SUPENsessiOn of all the earlier instructions on the subject, giv ing guiding piinci ioles which . ore ashereunder:
-- Goverment servant 1 'tdken. so that the - need: for. keeping the case of-a Government setvant | ine secied cover fs limited fo the borest roirirmum. it has, thereiore, 'baen decided. that the. comprehensively the cases. of "Government servants, whose suilcibilify for pro ration to @ higher grade has been "kept inva Sealed Cover Gn the expiry of 6 rioniths from the dafe of convening -t first Departmental promofion BA oT As. "necessary" o ensure thet the disciplinary 2 case/crimifial prosec fon. inslifuted' against. any. | snot unduly prolonged - and aie.
efforts to finalize expedi ously. {he proceedings should be.» | GPpO infing- authorities conceined should revi iow 22 _ Commite here adivdged | his is suHabI ity ond kept findings ih. ad cover | @ Gppointing "guihort y comes "to"
would not be against tne public ine "cone | os forall sromotion to fhe Government servant; hi ee 'cose: jlaced before the next DPC hold In the eerie afier the expiry. of thé two year period to. decid ne. officer is sulfable for promotion on ad--
"hoc | ® folalify of the individual's record of © SQrvict faking Hq account the - (pending cHimrinat oros@culions aga Ginst hima BQ. sion is token to: promote a Government servan mac pass. aon order of promotion may - oe asu Clecr in the order itsell tha 12 ohne c promotion wil i not confer for reguia : promotions an od smotion snail be "until further orders" ie algo" be indicated int he orders thatthe. rnentreserve the tight to coricel the dd- ro motion 'and revert at any time: the | sraent servant to the post from which Re- mgt ed?' _ 42 0 | Weh mat 1992 circular which is referred by The goplcant is the r the central Government employees in 4999 clrcular is specified for ea India in AI India Service and unike central otions are nohie be ¢ gronted i at ine e cases jaty proceedings jr iitiated agoinst them ; cidl- hoe promot ons Were granted to the | above clrevlar dated 15:01 201 9 otoris b ing rade on purely ad-hoc Manjula Das Hon'ble Member (3) 'Sd/-
.. Mr. N. Neihsial . Hon'ble. Murer (A OE