Central Administrative Tribunal - Jammu
Ghulam Nabi vs D/O Home Ut Of Jammu & Kashmir on 19 February, 2026
:: 1 :: TA 8710/2020
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JAMMU BENCH, JAMMU (RESERVED)
Hearing through video conferencing
Transfer Application No. 8710/2020
Reserved on: - 14.07.2025
Pronounced on: - 19.02.2026
HON'BLE MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE MR. RAM MOHAN JOHRI, MEMBER (A)
1. Ghulam Nabi aged 30 years S/o Shri Mohd. Akber R/o Gurmul,
Kastigarh, Doda.
2. Mohan Murary aged 36 years S/o Shri Paras Ram Thakur R/o
Village Jhatgali Tehsil and District, Ramban.
...Applicants
(Advocate: - Mr. M.P Sharma)
Versus
1. State of Jammu and Kashmir through Commissioner/Secretary
to
2. Director General of Police, J&K, Jammu.
3. Inspector General of Police, Zone, Jammu.
4. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Doda-Kishtwar-Ramban
Range, Hqrs. Batote.
5. Senior Superintendent of Police, Ramban.
6. Senior Superintendent of Police, Doda.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 2 :: TA 8710/2020
7. Pawan Singh No:333/SPO S/o Shri Tara Chand R/o Balihote
Tehsil and District, Ramban.
8. Jagir Singh No:648/SPO S/o Ram Ditta R/o Soomber Harog
Tehsil Gool Gulab Garh, District, Udhampur.
...Respondents
(Advocate:- Mr. Rajesh Thappa, AAG, Mr. Sudesh Magotra, Ld.
AAG)
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 3 :: TA 8710/2020
ORDER
Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
1. The SWP No.1066/2016 was transferred from the Hon'ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A No.8710/2020 by the Registry of this Tribunal.
2. The present matter was filed before the Hon'ble High Court seeking following relief: -
"To regularize the services of the petitioners by creating necessary posts i.e. constable and extend to them all benefits retrospectively attached to the post.
ii) To promote/appoint petitioners as Constable, by formulating policy for regularization as Constable or for appointments as retrospectively. Constables To set aside or quash order No:3113 of 2015 dated Oct. 13th, 2015.
iv) To issue any other appropriate writ order or direction which your lordship deemfit in the present set of circumstances of the case.
3. The facts of the case as pleaded by the petitioners in their pleadings are as follows: -
a) The present Transfer Application arises out of SWP No. 1066/2016, which was originally filed before the Hon'ble High HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 4 :: TA 8710/2020 Court of Jammu & Kashmir at Jammu and, upon constitution of this Tribunal, stood transferred and was registered as T.A. No. 8710/2020.
b) The applicants, namely Ghulam Nabi and Mohan Murary, assert that they are permanent residents of the erstwhile State of Jammu & Kashmir and were engaged as Special Police Officers (SPOs) under Section 18 of the Jammu and Kashmir Police Act, 1983 (1927 A.D.). Applicant No.1, Ghulam Nabi, was appointed as SPO vide Order No. 2146 of 1998 dated 26.11.1998 and was assigned Belt No. 1932/SPO. Applicant No.2, Mohan Murary, was appointed vide Order No. 2213 of 1999 dated 11.10.1999 and was assigned Belt No. 3899/SPO.
Since their engagement, both applicants have been continuously discharging duties as SPOs without any break.
c) It is pleaded that during their tenure, the applicants actively participated in various anti-militancy operations conducted by the Police and Army units in the Ramban and adjoining areas. Specific reference has been made to an operation dated 21.08.2003 at Garu Top (Vernal Post), conducted under the HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 5 :: TA 8710/2020 supervision of Dy. SP (Operations), Banihal, wherein two militants affiliated with HM Group were eliminated and arms, including two AK-56 rifles, were recovered. It is asserted that Applicant No.1 played a direct and decisive role in the said operation and that his name was recommended for appointment/regularization as Constable vide recommendation letter No. 223/Ops dated 20.10.2003. Further, the applicants claim participation in other counter-insurgency operations leading to elimination of foreign militants and recovery of arms and ammunition, for which commendation certificates were allegedly issued.
d) The applicants contend that pursuant to Government instructions issued by the Home Department vide letters dated 09.06.2009, 25.09.2008, and 02.07.2009, certain measures were approved for the benefit of SPOs, including their consideration for absorption as Constables after completion of three years of service. According to them, they fulfilled the eligibility criteria and reasonably expected regularization/absorption in view of HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 6 :: TA 8710/2020 their long and continuous service coupled with operational performance.
e) However, vide Order No. 1798 of 2015 dated 24.03.2015 and endorsement dated 24.06.2015, 106 SPOs were absorbed as Constables, but the names of the applicants did not figure in the list. The applicants allege that certain SPOs, including private respondents, who allegedly had no comparable operational achievements, were absorbed, thereby violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
f) Subsequently, the Director General of Police issued Order No. 3113 of 2015 dated 13.10.2015 rejecting the claim of the applicants on the ground that they had not performed any extraordinary or consistent operational role warranting absorption as Constables. Aggrieved thereof, and after earlier writ petitions (WP(S) No. 754/2010 and WP(S) No. 243/2014) were disposed of with directions for consideration, the applicants instituted the present proceedings seeking:
Regularization by creation of necessary posts of Constable with retrospective benefits;
HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 7 :: TA 8710/2020 Promotion/appointment as Constables by formulating an appropriate policy;
Quashing of Order No. 3113 of 2015 dated 13.10.2015; and Other appropriate reliefs.
g) The core grievance of the applicants is that despite long service since 1998-1999 and alleged commendable operational contribution, they have been denied absorption as Constables, whereas allegedly less meritorious SPOs have been appointed.
4. The respondents have filed their reply statement wherein they have averred as follows: -
h) The respondents submit that no constitutional, legal, or statutory right of the applicants has been infringed. It is contended that the applicants have no vested right to seek appointment/regularization as Constables merely on the basis of their engagement as SPOs. The writ petition, according to the respondents, discloses no cause of action and is liable to be dismissed.
i) It is further pleaded that the absorption of SPOs as Constables is governed by specific Government instructions issued by the HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 8 :: TA 8710/2020 Home Department, and such absorption is not automatic but conditional upon fulfillment of laid down criteria. The applicants, it is stated, did not meet the prescribed standards and therefore were not found fit for absorption.
j) The respondents admit that the applicants were engaged as SPOs under Section 18 of the Police Act on operational grounds. However, it is categorically asserted that the applicants performed only routine operational duties and did not exhibit extraordinary or consistent operational performance that would justify their induction as Constables.
k) With regard to the alleged recommendation letter dated 20.10.2003, the respondents clarify that the name of Applicant No.1 did not figure in the list recommended for induction as Constable; rather, his name was forwarded only for suitable reward.
l) The respondents further submit that recommendations for induction are scrutinized by the Police Headquarters, where each case is evaluated minutely on the touchstone of consistent and extraordinary performance on the anti-militancy front.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 9 :: TA 8710/2020 Since the applicants did not fulfill the essential criteria of exceptional operational contribution, they were not recommended for absorption.
m) It is also contended that Order No. 3113 of 2015 dated 13.10.2015 was passed after due application of mind and in accordance with policy guidelines. The Home Department letters relied upon by the applicants do not confer any automatic or ipso facto right of regularization. Each case is required to be assessed on its own merits by the competent authority.
n) In compliance with earlier directions issued by the Hon'ble High Court in WP(S) No. 754/2010 and WP(S) No. 243/2014, the claim of the applicants was reconsidered; however, upon evaluation, they were found ineligible for absorption due to absence of extraordinary operational role.
o) The respondents therefore pray for dismissal of the Transfer Application, contending that the applicants seek regularization as a matter of right, which is neither supported by statutory provisions nor by policy guidelines.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 10 :: TA 8710/2020
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
6. The present Transfer Application arises out of SWP No. 1066/2016, which stood transferred from the Hon'ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and registered as T.A. No. 8710/2020 before this Tribunal. The applicants seek quashing of Order No. 3113 of 2015 dated 13.10.2015 and pray for their absorption/regularization as Constables in J&K Police with retrospective benefits.
7. Applicant No.1, Ghulam Nabi, was appointed as Special Police Officer (SPO) vide Order No. 2146 of 1998 dated 26.11.1998, and Applicant No.2, Mohan Murary, was appointed vide Order No. 2213 of 1999 dated 11.10.1999 under Section 18 of the J&K Police Act. Both applicants have continuously rendered service as SPOs since their engagement without break.
8. The record reflects that Applicant No.1 participated in significant anti-
militancy operations, including an operation dated 21.08.2003 at Garu Top (Vernal Post), wherein two hardcore militants affiliated with HM Group were eliminated and arms were recovered. His role was HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 11 :: TA 8710/2020 acknowledged at the operational level, and his name was recommended vide letter No. 223/Ops dated 20.10.2003.
9. The applicants further rely upon Government instructions issued by the Home Department in 2008-2009 providing measures for the benefit of SPOs and consideration for their absorption as Constables subject to eligibility.
10. In 2015, 106 SPOs were absorbed as Constables; however, the names of the applicants did not figure in the said list. Subsequently, Order No. 3113 of 2015 dated 13.10.2015 rejected their claim on the ground that they had not shown extraordinary and consistent operational performance.
11. The respondents contend that the applicants performed only routine operational duties and did not fulfill the criteria of extraordinary and consistent operational performance necessary for absorption. It is pleaded that no automatic right of regularization accrues under the policy and that evaluation rests with the competent authority.
12. It is undisputed that the applicants were appointed under Section 18 of the Police Act and have served continuously since 1998-1999. The power under Section 18 was exercised in the backdrop of militancy in HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 12 :: TA 8710/2020 the State, conferring upon SPOs police powers and subjecting them to disciplinary control akin to regular police personnel.
13. The record demonstrates that Applicant No.1 was specifically recommended by the operational authorities vide letter dated 20.10.2003. The respondents have not placed on record any adverse material negating such recommendation. While the respondents assert absence of "extraordinary performance," the fact of formal recommendation by the competent Superintendent of Police cannot be brushed aside lightly.
14. Absorption of similarly situated SPOs in 2015, while excluding the applicants without cogent distinction, attracts the vice of arbitrariness. Article 14 mandates fairness and non-discrimination. When a policy exists enabling consideration for absorption, and when operational authorities have recommended a candidate, rejection must be supported by objective reasons. A bald assertion of "routine performance" is insufficient, particularly when the applicants participated in counter-insurgency operations acknowledged in official correspondence.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 13 :: TA 8710/2020
15. Long and uninterrupted service of more than two decades further strengthens their equitable claim. Though regularization is not a matter of right in abstract, where a policy framework exists and recommendations have been made by competent authorities, denial without transparent criteria amounts to hostile discrimination.
16. The impugned Order No. 3113 of 2015 does not disclose detailed reasoning; it merely records non-fulfillment of extraordinary role. Such a cryptic rejection fails the test of reasoned decision-making.
17. In view of the above discussion, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the rejection of the applicants' claim is arbitrary and unsustainable.
18. Accordingly, the Transfer Application is allowed with the following directions:
a) Order No. 3113 of 2015 dated 13.10.2015 is quashed to the extent it rejects the claim of the applicants.
b) The respondents are directed to absorb/appoint the applicants as Constables in J&K Police against available vacancies within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 14 :: TA 8710/2020
c) The applicants shall be entitled to notional seniority from the date their immediate juniors were absorbed in 2015.
d) Monetary benefits shall accrue prospectively from the date of their actual appointment pursuant to this order; however, pay fixation shall be made notionally from the date of deemed induction for the purpose of seniority and pensionary benefits.
e) In case no vacancy is available, the respondents shall create supernumerary posts to accommodate the applicants, which shall be adjusted against future vacancies.
19. The Transfer Application stands allowed in the above terms. No order as to costs.
(RAM MOHAN JOHRI) (RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
/harshit/
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV