Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
Pradeep Bhalchandra Sawant vs M/O Home Affairs on 5 March, 2026
1 OA.339/2016
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI.
O.A.339/2016
Dated this Thursday the 05th day of March, 2026
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Shri Krishna, Member (Administrative)
Hon'ble Mr.Umesh Gajankush, Member (Judicial)
Shri Pradeep Bhalchandra Sawant,
Residing at Amba Bhavan,
Near Indian Gymkhana, Road No.5,
Bhau Daji Road, Matunga,
Mumbai - 400 019. .. Applicant.
( By Advocate Shri R.G. Walia ).
Versus
1. Union of India, through
The Secretary,
Government of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
South Block New Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Secretary,
Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal
Hemant Anant
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone=
0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode=
400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER=
44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant
Anant Mahabal
Mahabal
Reason: I am the author of this document
Union Public Service Commission,
Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road,
New Delhi - 110 001.
3. The Chief Secretary,
State of Maharashtra,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032.
4. The Additional Chief Secretary (Home),
Government of Maharashtra,
Home Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 400 032.
2 OA.339/2016
5. Shri D.Y. Mandlik (DIG),
Commissioner of Police,
Amravati - 444 601. .. Respondents.
( By Advocates Dr.V.S. Masurkar, for R-1,3 & 4 and Dr.V.B.
Joshi, for R-2 ).
Order reserved on : 06.1.2026
Order pronounced on : 05.03.2026
ORDER
Per : Umesh Gajankush, Member (J)
The present O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 has been filed by the applicant seeking the following reliefs:-
"(a) that this Hon'ble Tribunal be graciously pleased to call for the records of the case and after examining the same direct the Respondents to include the name of the Applicant in the list of candidate appointed by promotion which came to be issued on 30/4/2009 since there was no charge framed against the Applicant in the criminal proceeding which was launched against him from the date of filing of the case in the MCOCA Court until 4/12/2010;Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal
Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
(b) that this Hon'ble Tribunal be further pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the case of the Applicant for grant of further ad hoc promotion in the IPS based on his appointment by promotion to the IPS in respect of the select list for the year 2008;
(c) that this Hon'ble Tribunal be further pleased to grant all consequential benefits including back wages on par with the immediate junior of the Applicant Shri D.Y. Mandlik who is presently posted as Deputy Inspector General of Police;
(d) cost of this application be provided for; 3 OA.339/2016
(e) any other and further orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and appropriate in the facts of the case be passed;"
2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant is a direct recruit Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) in the State Police Service of the State of Maharashtra and joined service as a Deputy Superintendent of Police on 20.6.1986. The applicant is a graduate in Chemistry from the University of Mumbai and has had formidable encomiums showered on him including the President's Police Medal for meritorious service on 15th August, 2002, insignia awarded by the Director General of Police for outstanding work in the year 1999, the prestigious Deepak Jog Memorial Trophy for the Best Detection for the year 1999, Best Detection and Investigation Award for the year 1998, 26 Commendations and 5 Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Appreciations in his illustrious career until he was unfortunately Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 embroiled in a conspiracy relating to one Abdul Karim Telgi which is infamously known as "the Telgi scam".
2.1. It is stated that while serving as DCP (Detection), Crime Branch, Mumbai from 07.3.2000 onwards, he stumbled upon the Telgi Scam in which he came to be embroiled by the powers that he eventually resulted in his being arrested on 07.1.2004 till 4 OA.339/2016 29.08.2004 when bail was granted to him by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Application No.1963/2004 on 27.08.2004. It is submitted that under the MCOCA Act unless the judicial authority granting bail comes to a prima-facie conclusion that there is a reasonable ground to believe that he could not be held guilty of such an offence under the said Act.
2.2. It is submitted that thereafter the applicant has filed an application for discharge from being prosecuted under the MCOCA Act before the Hon'ble Special Judge at Pune and vide order dated 26.06.2007, the applicant was discharged from all offences in respect of the said criminal proceedings. The aforesaid order of discharge came to be challenged by the CBI by way of Criminal Appeal No.764/2007 in which vide order dated Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 27.02.2008, the Hon'ble High Court at Bombay pronounced the judgment, wherein one of the Hon'ble Judges agreed and upheld the order of discharge, the second Hon'ble Judge of the Division Bench overturned the order of discharge passed by the Special Judge. This resulted in the matter being referred to a Hon'ble Third Judge, who in turn, vide order dated 14.07.2010, agreed 5 OA.339/2016 with the Hon'ble Judge who had overturned the order of discharge on account of which the Hon'ble Special Judge at Pune was directed to frame the charge against the applicant on 04.12.2010 and proceeded with the trial against the applicant. 2.3. It is further submitted that in the interregnum the select list in respect of vacancies for the year 2004 and 2005 came to be notified vide order No.1-14011/14/2005-IPS.I dated 27.01.2006.
In the said Notification the applicant's name finds place at Sr.No.16 and at the bottom of the page it is recorded that the name of the applicant has been included in the list provisionally subject to clearance in the criminal proceedings pending against him and grant of integrity certificate by the State Government. After the order of discharge passed by the Learned Special Judge, Pune, applicant invoked the jurisdiction of this Tribunal by filing Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 O.A.No.590/2009 which was disposed of vide order dated 17.12.2009 directing the applicant to approach the Government by way of a representation seeking reinstatement in service. 2.4. It is submitted that post this order on 17.12.2009, in the year 2010, when the Hon'ble Third Judge upheld the order of one of the Judges who had overturned the order of discharge by the 6 OA.339/2016 Learned Special Judge, the applicant lost all hopes on account of which he did not pursue the matter any further but got himself down meticulously to the task of moving ahead with the trial. It is stated that post the notification dated 27.01.2006, several notifications came to be issued in respect of vacancy years 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 in which the applicant continued to figure prominently as a provisionally selected candidate awaiting vigilance clearance on account of the pending criminal proceedings.
2.5. It is further submitted that the applicant found himself in the list of provisionally selected candidates for the vacancy year 2004 at the young age of 40, but could not get appointed to the IPS and continued to languish on account of lack of vigilance clearance.
In the meanwhile 60 of his juniors from across of 11 batches of Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 officers appointed by promotion to the IPS have since come to supersede the applicant. It is stated that the promotion to the IPS are governed by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs OM No.45020/11/97-IPS-II dated 15.01.1999. By the said OM, the Ministry of Home Affairs has laid down guidelines for promotion in the IPS. The said guidelines dated 15.01.1999 do 7 OA.339/2016 not cover cases of appointment by promotion to the IPS but are concerned with further promotions to IPS Officers in Senior Scale, JAG, Selection Grade, Super Time Scale and above Super Time Scale. The same are, however, enclosed for the limited purpose of referring to and relying upon Guideline no.19 where it is clearly laid down that six monthly reviewed of sealed cover cases have to be carried out and attempts have to be made to ensure that either the departmental proceeding or the criminal prosecution whichever is being pursued against the officer are brought to an expeditious end. In Para 20 of the said Guidelines, it is laid down that there is no concept of ad-hoc promotion in cases where disciplinary or criminal prosecutions are prolonged and pending since there is a one-time confirmation existing in respect of All India Service. However, the said guidelines laid down for further Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 promotion to IPS officers is clearly based on the principle of not promoting an officer who is under a cloud either departmentally or on account of criminal prosecution to the IPS as per Regulation 7 of the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955.
2.6. It is submitted that the entire issue of sealed cover procedure to be followed in respect of officers was under judicial 8 OA.339/2016 scrutiny of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. K.V. Janakiraman. A careful perusal of the said judgment would show that the earlier DoPT OM of 1988 relating to sealed cover procedure came under scrutiny of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. After carefully considering the entire circular, the only amendment suggested by the Hon'ble Supreme Court was that merely a decision on file is taken to charge sheet an employee or proceed criminally, the same cannot come in the way of promotion. A careful perusal of the said OM would indicate unless a charge is framed, the promotion of a Government servant cannot be stopped. After carefully considering the 1988 OM issued by the Department of Personnel, the Hon'ble Supreme Court quashed certain paras thereof, consequently a fresh OM dated 14.09.1992 came to be issued. Taking true meaning and Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 effect of OM dated 14.09.1992 makes it clear that the promotion can only be stopped in three scenarios, the first being that the Government servant is under suspension, the second being that the Government servant in respect of whom a charge sheet has been issued and the disciplinary proceedings are pending and finally a situation where a Government servant in respect of whom 9 OA.339/2016 prosecution for a criminal charge is pending. The sentence "Government servants in respect of whom prosecution for a criminal charge is pending" is no longer open for any interpretation as the same has already been conclusively interpreted by various Courts and Tribunals across the country. The bottom line thereof being that a charge has to be actually framed and the concerned Judge should have taken cognizance thereof. The applicant states that even the DoPT has since clarified this position in its OM dated 02.11.2002.
2.7. The applicant in the OA stated about chronology of events, which is reproduced herein below:-
"1. 1986 Applicant appointed as direct Deputy Superintendent of Police in State Police Service (SPS) Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal
2. 07/03/2000 Applicant promoted as Dy. Commissioner of police Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
3. 15/08/2002 Applicant received Police Medal for meritorious Service Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
4. 07/01/2004 Applicant was arrested in C.R. No.135/2002, of Pune (Telgi Case) under MCOC Act and was placed under Suspension.
5. 27/08/2004 Applicant was granted bail by the High Court, Mumbai Under MCOC Act.
6. 27/01/2006 Applicant was selected in the selected list of 2004 for Indian Police Service Cadre.
7. 26/06/2007 Applicant was discharged from MCOC Act charges by Trial Court, Pune.10 OA.339/2016
8. 25/03/2009 Applicant was reinstated in service by the Government Of Maharashtra.
9. 30/04/2009 Applicant was selected in the select list of 2008 for Indian Police Service Cadre.
10. 19/05/2009 Applicant submitted letter to Government of Maharashtra.
11. 02/06/2009 Reminder to above mentioned letter.
12. 14/06/2009 Reminder to above mentioned letter.
13. 27/07/2009 Applicant was posted as Dy. Commissioner of Police, Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS) Mumbai by Government of Maharashtra.
14. 14/07/2010 The Third Judge gave judgment overturning order of Discharge by the Trial Court.
15. 04/12/2010 Charges were framed against applicant by the Trial Judge at Pune.
16. 15/05/2015 Applicant was transferred from Dy. Commissioner of Police, ATS, Mumbai to Dy. Commissioner of Police, HQ-1, Mumbai."
2.8. It is further submitted that the applicant was under Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal
suspension since 07.01.2004 which was ended on 25.03.2009. Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Thereafter, the applicant came to be posted as Dy. Commissioner Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 of Police (ATS), Mumbai vide order dated 31.07.2009. Therefore, according to the applicant all the three situations as envisaged in the DoPT OM of 14.09.1992, were not existing as on 25.03.2009, whereas a select list came to be issued on 30.04.2009 in respect of vacancies for the year 2008. As per Regulation 7 of the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955, which 11 OA.339/2016 categorically states that the provisional selection in a select list is for a period of six months or until 31st December of the year in which the select is declared. Therefore, according to the applicant in the select list for the vacancy year 2008, he ought to have been appointed by promotion to the IPS in the select list of 2008 and placed above Shri D.Y. Mandlik in the seniority of IPS officers in the rank of Dy. Commissioner of Police.
2.9. It is submitted that after reinstatement in service, after the unfortunate arrest on 07.01.2004, the applicant continued to be given extremely sensitive and prestigious appointment. At the time of infamous bomb blasts of 2002-03 as DCP (Crime Br.) and the bomb blasts of 2010, 2011 and 2012 he was continued on the post of DCP, ATS. It is further submitted that the between 25.03.2009 and 04.12.2010, none of the 3 situations as envisaged Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 in the OM were prevailing when the select list of 2008 was notified on 30.04.2009, therefore, the provisional appointment was required to be converted into a regular appointment. Based on the same, the applicant is entitled to be considered for further promotions in the IPS.12 OA.339/2016
2.10. It is also stated that for the vacancy year 2014 vide notification dated 05.01.2016, also the applicant has been selected provisionally. Therefore, the aforesaid impugned actions have been challenged by the applicant as violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and according to the applicant he is entitled to be appointed by promotion to the IPS in respect of select list dated 30.04.2009 clearly on the ground that no charge has been framed against the applicant in the criminal case. 2.11. Along with O.A., the applicant has filed M.A.374/2016, application for condonation of delay.
3. After notice, the Respondent No.1, i.e. Union of India has filed its reply contesting the O.A.
3.1. It has been submitted that the authorized strength of Indian Police Service of any State comprises of two components namely Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 direct recruitment quota and promotion quota. Direct recruit IPS officers come through Civil Services Exam conducted by the UPSC, whereas State Police Service officers are inducted into IPS against promotion quota. The subject matter of the instant OA relates to the IPS officer recruited against the promotion quota of Maharashtra State. Recruitment against this promotion quota is 13 OA.339/2016 little lengthy process wherein three stake holders have their roles to complete this process. These stake holders are the State Government concerned, the UPSC and the Central Government. The roles of all these three stake holders are well defined in the Indian Police Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1954, Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 and IPS (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1988.
3.2. The process starts from the determination of the vacancies by the Central Government against the promotion quota of any state for a particular calendar year. After this determination, the State Government concerned forwards a proposal to the UPSC containing the details/records of the State Police Service officers in the order of their seniority. The zone of consideration is three times of the number of vacancies notified. The UPSC scrutinizes Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 these details / records and accepts the proposal once all the deficiencies are cured. Thereafter, the UPSC convenes a meeting of all the three stake holders which is known as 'Selection Committee Meeting. This meeting is chaired by the Chairman / Member of the Commission and Senior officers from the State Government and the Central Government are its members. The 14 OA.339/2016 Selection Committee scrutinizes the records / ACRs and other details of SPS officers thoroughly and as per the provisions of Regulation 5(4) of the promotions Regulations categorize the eligible officers in the zone of consideration as 'OUTSTANDING', 'VERY GOOD', 'GOOD', or 'UNFIT' as the case may be.
Thereafter the Selection Committee prepares a list by including the required number of names first from amongst the officers finally classified as 'Outstanding' then from amongst those similarly classified as 'Very Good' and thereafter from amongst those similarly classified as 'Good' and the order of names inter-
se within in category in the order of their seniority in the State Police Service.
3.3. It has been submitted that the name of an officer so included in the list, shall be treated as provisional, if the State Government, Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 withholds the integrity certificate in respect of such an officer or any proceedings, departmental or criminal, are pending against him or anything adverse against him which renders him unsuitable for appointment to the service has come to the notice of the State Government. It is further stated that while preparing year-wise select lists for more than one year pursuant to the second proviso 15 OA.339/2016 to sub-regulation (1), the officer included provisionally in any of the select list so prepared, shall be considered for inclusion in the select list of subsequent year in addition to the normal consideration zone and in case he is found fit for inclusion in the suitability list for that year on a provisional basis, such inclusion shall be in addition to the normal size of the select list determined by the Central Government for such year. The number of officers included in the list is equal to the number of vacancies notified and this list is known as 'Select List' of that particular calendar year. Explanation I: The proceedings shall be treated as pending only if a charge-sheet has actually been issued to the officer or filed in a court, as the case may be.
Explanation II: The adverse thing which came to the notice of the State Government rendering him unsuitable for appointment to Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 the service shall be treated as having come to the notice of the State only if the details of the same have been communicated to the Central Government and the Central Government is satisfied that the details furnished by the State Government have a bearing on the suitability of the officer and investigation thereof is essential.16 OA.339/2016
3.4. It has been submitted that the Committee records its recommendations in the shape of 'Minutes' which are signed by each member and the Chairperson. These minutes are first sent to the State Government concerned which in turn forwards these to the Central Government after its concurrence. Central Government also examines minutes and conveys its concurrence to the UPSC. Finally, these are placed before the Commission.
The Commission conveys its approval to the Central Government which is the cadre controlling authority for the Indian Police Service. Thereafter, the Central Government appoints those officer into Indian Police Service who are included in the Select List unconditionally exactly in the order in which their names appear in the Select List. The Select List and the appointments both are notified by the Central Government in the official Gazette. Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 Subsequently, these promotes IPS Officers are granted batch year of the IPS in terms of the IPS (Seniority) Regulations which takes carte of the length of the service rendered by the officer in the State Police Service.
3.5. It has been further submitted that the applicant is the accused No.65 (Shri P.B. Sawant) in MCOC Case No.2/2003 in 17 OA.339/2016 the Court of Special Judge (Under the MCOC Act) Pune at Pune.
As per the judgment dated 04.12.2010 passed by Special Judge (Under MCOC Act) Pune at Pune in MCOC Case No.2/2003 C.B.I. (A.C.B.) Mumbai Vs. Mahamad Gaus Maulali Siggave & Others, the applicant entered into a criminal conspiracy during the period December, 1998 to January, 2003 at various places at Mumbai, Thane, Pune, Nasik in the State of Maharashtra. The applicant is involved in various unlawful activities, illegal acts in an organized manner as a member of an Organized Crime Syndicate which continued even after 21.02.1999 when the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 came into force thus bringing all unlawful activities of an organized manner syndicate under its purview. The applicant obtained illegal and undue pecuniary advantages, as well as monetary and other types of gains/benefits Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 by committing criminal offences relating to dealing in sale- possession, transport storage and manufacture of counterfeit Government stamps and stamp papers and purchase receipts purportedly issued by the office of the Superintendent of Stamps, Mumbai. The applicant misused his position as public servant. Further, the applicant (Accused No.65) was involved in criminal 18 OA.339/2016 conspiracy being a public servant in his capacity as the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch (Det) Mumbai between the periods from 2000 to November, 2003 by abusing his official position rendered help or support to the continuing unlawful activities of the Organized Crime Syndicate. Therefore, the integrity of the officer was doubtful and State Government did not issue any integrity certificate in respect of the applicant for the Select Lists 2004, 2006 to 2008, 2010 to 2012 and 2014. 3.6. It has been submitted that as per Rule 7(4) of IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955, reads as under:-
"the provisional Select List shall remain in force till 31st day of December of the year in which the meeting of the Selection Committee was held with a view to prepare the list under sub-regulation (1) of regulation (5) or upto sixty days from the date of approval of the select list by the Commission Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 under sub-regulation (1) or as the case may be, finally approved under sub-regulation (2), whichever is later:
Provided that where the State Government has forwarded the proposal to declare a provisionally included officer in the Select List as "unconditional" to the Commission during the period when the select list was in force, (the Commission shall decide the matter within a period of forty five days) or before the date of meeting of the next selection committee, whichever is earlier and if the 19 OA.339/2016 Commission declares the inclusion of the provisionally included officer in the select list as unconditional and final, the appointment of the concerned officer shall be considered by the Central Government under regulation 9 and such appointment shall not be invalid merely for the reason that it was made after the Select List ceased to be in force".
Provided that the name of an officer so included in the list, shall be treated as provisional, if the State Government, withholds the integrity certificate in respect of such an officer or any proceedings, departmental or criminal, are pending against him or anything adverse against him which rendered him unsuitable for appointment to the service has come to the notice of the State Government.
3.7. It has been submitted that Regulation 5(5) of IPS Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955, reads as under:-
Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 "Provided that the name of an officer so included in the list, shall be treated as provisional, if the State Government, withholds the integrity certificate in respect of such an officer or any proceedings, departmental or criminal, are pending against him or anything adverse against him which renders 20 OA.339/2016 him unsuitable for appointment to the service has come to the notice of the State Government."
As per the provisions of the aforementioned Regulation the applicant was included in the Select List-2008 subject to clearance of criminal proceedings and grant of integrity certificate by the State Government.
3.8. It has been further submitted that as per the judgment dated 04.12.2010 passed by Special Judge (Under MCOC Act) Pune at Pune in MCOC Case No.2/2003-C.B.I. (A.C.B.) Mumbai Vs. Mahamad Gaus Maulali Siggave & Others, the integrity of the officer was doubtful and State Government did not issued any integrity certificate in respect of the applicant to the Select Lists 2004, 2006 to 2008, 2010 to 2012 and 2014. It is stated that the meeting of the Selection Committee was held on 30.12.2008 to Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 prepare Select List - 2008. The UPSC approved the Select List
- 2008 on 20.04.2009. As per the above rules, the validity of the Select List - 2008 was till 19.06.2009. The applicant is requesting to consider his name in the Select List of 2008 which lapsed on 19.06.2009.21 OA.339/2016
3.9. It has been submitted that as per Regulation 5(5) of IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955, the name of the applicant was considered provisionally in the Select List 2004, 2006 to 2008, 2010 to 2012 and 2014 subject to clearance of criminal proceedings and grant of integrity certificate by the State Government. Criminal and disciplinary proceeding against the applicant started before 2004. Hence, the State Government did not issue any integrity certificate in respect of the applicant to the Select Lists 2004, 2006 to 2008, 2010 to 2012 and 2014, which was a pre-requisite for induction into IPS in terms of Regulation 5(5) of IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955.
4. The Respondent No.2, UPSC has also filed separate reply and contested the O.A., stating that the UPSC discharge their functions and duties assigned to them under Article 320 of the Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 Constitution. Further, by virtue of the provisions in the All India Services Act, 1951, separate Recruitment Rules have been framed for the IAS/IPS/IFoS. In pursuance of these Rules, the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 have been framed. In accordance with the provisions of the said Regulations, the Selection Committee, presided over by the Chairman/Member 22 OA.339/2016 of the UPSC, makes selection of State Police Service officers for appointment by promotion to the IPS based on the proposal and records sent by the State Government concerned.
4.1. It has been submitted that as per Regulation 5(1) of the Promotion Regulations, the number of vacancies against which selection is to be made for a particular Select List year for promotion to the Indian Police Service of a State Cadre is determined by the Government of India. Thereafter, the State Government forward a proposal to the Commission along with the Seniority List, Eligibility List, Integrity Certificates, certificates regarding disciplinary / criminal proceedings, certificate regarding communication of adverse remarks, details of penalties imposed on the eligible officers etc. and ACR dossiers of the eligible officers. The above documents as received from the State Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 Government are examined by the Commission for completeness and after the deficiencies have been resolved and reconciled, a meeting of the Selection Committee is convened for preparing the Select List for promotion to the Indian Police Service. 4.2. It has been further submitted that in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 5(4) of the Promotion Regulations, the 23 OA.339/2016 aforesaid Committee duly classifies the eligible State Police Service officers included in the zone of consideration as 'Outstanding', 'Very Good', 'Good' or 'Unfit', as the case may be, on an overall relative assessment of their service records.
Thereafter, as per the provisions of Regulation 5(5) of the said Regulations, the Selection Commission prepares a list by including the required number of names first from amongst the officers finally classified as 'Outstanding', then from amongst those similarly classified as 'Very Good' and thereafter from amongst those similarly classified as 'Good' and the order of names within each category is maintained in the order of their respective inter-se seniority in the State Police Service. 4.3. It has been submitted that the ACRs of eligible officers are the basic inputs on the basis of which eligible officers are Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 categorized as 'Outstanding', 'Very Good', 'Good' and 'Unfit' in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 5(4) of the Promotion Regulations. The Selection Committee is not guided merely by the overall grading that may be recorded in the ACRs but in order to ensure justice, equity and fair play makes its own assessment on the basis of in-depth examination of service 24 OA.339/2016 records of eligible officers, deliberating on the quality of the officer on the basis of performance as reflected under various column s recorded by the Reporting Officer / Reviewing Officer / Accepting Authority in the ACRs for different years and then finally arrives at the classification to be assigned to each eligible officer in accordance with provisions of Promotion Regulations. While making an overall assessment, the Selection Committee takes into account orders regarding appreciation for meritorious work done by the officer concerned. Similarly, the Selection Committee also keeps in view orders awarding penalties or any adverse remarks communicated to the officer, which, even after due consideration of his representation have not been completely expunged.
4.4. It has been submitted that as per the provisions of Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 Regulation 6 and 6-A, the State Government and the Central Government are required to furnish their observations on the recommendation of the Selection Committee. After taking into consideration the observations of the State Government and the Central Government and the requisite records received from the /State Government, the Commission take a final decision on the 25 OA.339/2016 recommendations of the Selection Committee with or without modifications in terms of the provisions of Regulation 7. The appointments to the Indian Police Service are made from the Select List by the Central Government, Ministry of Home Affairs during the validity period of the Select List. The above procedure is being uniformly followed for all the States/Cadres in the matter of induction to the All India Services.
4.5. It has been further submitted that at the time of the SCM, the State Government had intimated that criminal proceedings were pending against the applicant in which charge-sheet was filed by CBI on 26.07.2005 in Special MCOCA Court, Pune. The applicant was discharged by the Special MCOCA Court, vide order dated 20.06.2007 which was challenged by the CBI in Criminal Appeal No.763/2007 filed before the Hon'ble High Court, Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 Mumbai. The Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 18.09.2007 stayed the operation of the order dated 20.06.2007 of the Special MCOCA Court. Therefore, the criminal proceedings were pending against the applicant at the time of the SCM as per information furnished by the State Government. The integrity certificate of the applicant was also withheld by the State Government. Therefore, 26 OA.339/2016 the name of the applicant was included in the Select List provisionally, in terms of the 1st proviso to the Regulation 5(5) of the Promotion Regulations.
4.6. It is submitted that while forwarding the observations of the State Government on the recommendations of the Selection Committee in terms of the Regulation 6 of the Promotion Regulations, the State Government, vide their letter dated 16.03.2009, had intimated that the Criminal Proceedings against the applicant was still pending. The State Government also intimated that the matter of granting the integrity certificate in favour of the applicant was reviewed by the State Government.
However, it was decided by the State Government to withhold the integrity of the applicant.
4.7. It has been further submitted that promotion to the All India Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 Services (IPS in this case) is made in accordance with the provisions of the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955. It is further mentioned that in terms of Explanation-I below Regulation 5(5) of the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955, criminal proceedings are deemed to be 27 OA.339/2016 pending if a charge-sheet has already been filed in a Court of Law. The said provision is as under:
"The proceedings shall be treated as pending only if a charge sheet has actually been issued to the officer or filed in a Court as the case may be"
In the promotion Regulations, there is no concept of treating criminal proceedings as pending only if charges have been framed by the Court. The position regarding treating of criminal proceedings as pending in the context of above Explanation has been made abundantly clear in the Judgment dated 08.03.2006 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Appeal (Civil) No.1586/2006 filed by Shri Gurpreet Singh Bhullar & Anr. Vs. UOI & Ors. The relevant extract is as under:
"Explanation-1 as quoted above will make it crystal clear that the proceedings shall be treated as pending only if a chargesheet has actually been issued to the officer or filed Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document in a Court. The language employed in the statute is Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 unambiguous. The Explanation nowhere states about charges having been framed by the Trial Court. The High Court, in our view, erroneously read something to the Explanation, which is not provided by the Regulation. There is no concept of charge being framed by the Trial Court in the context of Explanation 1 of the Regulation."
It is further mentioned that the said provision is being uniformly followed for all the States / Cadres in the matter of induction to the All India Services. Therefore, the contention of the applicant at 28 OA.339/2016 Para 3 is contrary to the Explanation-I below the Regulation 5(5) of the Promotion Regulations which is also upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
5. Thereafter, rejoinder was filed by the applicant explaining and elaborating his stand and by placing on record the order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court dated 18.09.2007 passed in Criminal Appeal No.764/2007, copy of order dated 05.10.2007 passed by the Hon'ble High Court in Criminal Application No.1122/2007 in Criminal Appeal No.764/2007. The order dated 27.02.2008 passed in Criminal Appeal No.764/2007 of Hon'ble Division Bench (Different Views). Copy of order dated 14.07.2010 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Criminal Appeal No.764/2007 (3rd Hon'ble Judge's view).
6. We have heard Shri R.G. Walia, learned counsel for the Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 applicant, Dr.V.S. Masurkar, for R-1, 3 and 4, Dr.V.B. Joshi, for R- 2 and perused the record.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argued that on the date of issuance of notification dated 30.04.2009 (Annex- A-1) there was no charge framed against the applicant by the Competent Criminal Court and in fact the discharge order was 29 OA.339/2016 passed by the Learned Special Judge on 26.06.2007 and, therefore, the selection of the applicant by appending the note provisionally subject to clearance of criminal proceedings and grant of integrity certificate by the State Government is illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable. It is submitted that the OM dated 14.09.1992 and 02.11.2002 specifically provides that only in 3 contingencies the promotion can be withheld, first the Government is under suspension, secondly, the charge-sheet has been issued and the disciplinary proceedings are pending and thirdly in a situation where in respect of Government Servant charges have been framed.
7.1. It is submitted that on the relevant date of convening meeting of the Selection Committee for vacancy year 2008 held on 30.12.2008 none of the contingencies were available and, Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 therefore, applicant was entitled to include his name in the list of candidates appointed by promotion which came to be issued on 30.04.2009. During course of the arguments he has drawn our attention to page 96 which is about "General Principles Regarding Mode of Selection Etc. For Promotion And Functions Of Screening Committees Etc." More specifically Sr.No.11 which is about 30 OA.339/2016 procedure to be followed in respect of officers under cloud and Sr.No.15 which is about "Vigilance clearance while implementing the committee recommendations". Further, he has relied upon Point of Doubt and Clarifications received vide Government of India letter No.16011/12/00-IPS II, dated 29.10.1999. The aforesaid clarification clearly provides that integrity certificate has to be withheld only in cases falls under one or the other category of cases which can be placed in the sealed cover as laid down in MHA letter dated 15.01.1999.
7.2. It is also contended that in the facts and circumstances mentioned in the M.A.374/2016 for condonation of delay, by taking liberal view, said application may be allowed in the interest of justice and matter may be decided on merits.
8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 vehemently argued that taking note of the length and width of the scam in which the applicant is one of the accused no interference can be made in the present O.A.
8.1. It is contended that there is no dispute that the applicant was arrested in CR No.135/2002 on 07.01.2004 in which bail was granted on 27.08.2004, although the discharge order was passed 31 OA.339/2016 by the Learned Special Judge on 26.06.2007, however, the said order was subject matter of challenge in the Criminal Appeal No.764/2007 before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in which since there was different view of the 2 Hon'ble Judges of the Hon'ble High Court, one uphold the order of discharge whereas the other view was against the discharge order and, therefore, the matter was referred to 3rd Hon'ble Judge of the High Court and the Hon'ble 3rd Judge was pleased to set aside the order dated 26.06.2007 and directed the Special Judge to frame the charges against the applicant and proceed further and thereafter the Learned Special Judge framed the charges against the applicant on 04.12.2010.
8.2. It is submitted that as per the provisions of IPS (Appointment by Promotion), Regulation, 1955, the selection, induction and Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 appointment to an IPS is depending upon the various stages / steps and the integrity certificate by the State Government is pre- condition for induction and appointment in the IPS. 8.3. It is submitted that merely between 25.03.2009 to 04.12.2010, there was no suspension or charge-sheet was pending in the departmental inquiry and no charge has been 32 OA.339/2016 framed by the Competent Court, the applicant cannot claim as a matter of right a promotion to the IPS. It is submitted that after registration of FIR against the applicant in Telgi Scam in CR No.135/2002, the applicant was arrested on 07.01.2004 and from the said date his integrity was doubtful. Further, in subsequent years also the case of the applicant was considered in the years 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and in fact in the year 2016 also.
However, similar note in respect of provisional selection subject to clearance of criminal proceedings and grant of integrity certificate by the State Government was mentioned. The applicant is not challenging the aforesaid note which was mentioned in the year 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 or 2016, but only challenging in respect of Notification dated 30.04.2009, possibly by taking benefit of particular situation prevalent from 25.03.2009 Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 to 04.12.2010 which was in fact reversed on the basis of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court dated 14.07.2010 in Criminal Appeal No.764/2007 by which the Hon'ble High Court set aside the order of discharge and directed the Special Court to frame the charge against the applicant which in fact framed on 04.12.2010. 33 OA.339/2016 Therefore, on the basis of statutory provision and reply on record, the respondents have prayed for dismissal of the O.A.
9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, so far as condonation of delay application is concerned by way of the present OA, the applicant is raising grievance in respect of Notification dated 30.04.2009 (Annex-A-
1), however, thereafter, also upto 2016 (Annex-A-15), the applicant was provisionally selected by mentioning the same note as mentioned in the Notification dated 30.04.2009. Further, in earlier round of litigation this Tribunal while deciding the O.A. No.590/2009 on 17.12.2009 directed the respondents to consider the representation of the applicant for induction into IPS against the vacancy pertaining to year 2004 onwards with all consequential benefits and thereafter, representation was Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 submitted, however, the respondents have not placed on record any order either rejecting the representation or accepting the representation. Even the respondents have not chosen to file reply to condonation application. Further, considering the legal issues raised by the parties, it would be appropriate to decide the issue on merits. Under these peculiar circumstances and totality 34 OA.339/2016 of facts of the case and taking note of fact that provisional select list vide Notification dated 05.01.2016 is also on record, the delay is condoned.
10. So far as the contention raised by the applicant that at the relevant period i.e. between 25.03.2009 and 04.12.2010 there was none of the 3 situations as contemplated in OM dated 14.09.1992 and 02.11.2002 were in existence and, therefore, he has right to be promoted as an IPS.
11. It is settled position of law that right to promotion for a particular post is not a fundamental right but right to be considered for the promotion is a fundamental right. Therefore, the promotion to a particular post is subject to compliance of statutory rules and the executive instructions, if any, governing the field.
12. From the record it is clear that while filing the rejoinder, Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 applicant has stated the list of dates and events which are as under:-
Date Events 07.06.2002 A case vide CR No.135/2002 was registered against Telgi gang By Pune Police.
03.02.2004 S.I.T. filed chargesheet against applicant - Mr.Sawant.
13.04.2005 Case was transferred to C.B.I. 35 OA.339/2016 26.07.2005 C.B.I. also filed chargesheet against applicant. 26.06.2007 The Trial Court discharged the Applicant. August, 2007 C.B.I. filed an appeal in Hon'ble High Court, Bombay, Against Discharge order of the Applicant. 18.09.2007 The Hon'ble High Court, Bombay, passed an order saying That "The above appeals are admitted, pending further orders, by way of interim relief, the impugned order dated 26th June, 2007 stands stayed."
05.10.2007 The Hon'ble High Court, Bombay vide its order vacated the stay Granted by its order dated 18.09.2007 (prayer clause (a) of Application of the Applicant.
27.02.2008 Order of discharge came to be challenged by the CBI by way Of Criminal Appeal No.764 of 2007. It is pertinent to mention here that a Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court at Bombay pronounced the judgment on 27.2.2008 wherein whilst one of the Judges agreed and upheld the order of discharge, the second Hon'ble Judge of the Division Bench overturned the order of discharge passed by the Special Judge. This resulted in the matter being referred to a third Judge. 19.05.2009 Applicant made a representation. 27.07.2009 Applicant was posted as Dy. Commissioner of Police, Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS) Mumbai by Government of Maharashtra.
Digitally signed by Hemant Anant MahabalHemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 14.07.2010 The third Judge agreed with the Hon'ble Judge who had 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 Overturned the order of discharge on account of which the Hon'ble Special Judge at Pune was directed to frame the charge and proceed with the trial against the Applicant. 04.12.2010 Hon'ble Special Judge at Pune framed the charges against The Applicant.
Looking to the aforesaid, it is clear that after registration of FIR in the year 2002, first S.I.T. filed charge-sheet against the applicant on 03.02.2004 and thereafter CBI has filed the charge-sheet on 26.07.2005. The Trial Courts discharged the applicant on 36 OA.339/2016 26.06.2007, however, the said order was stayed by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay on 18.09.2007, which was subsequently vacated on 05.10.2007. Thereafter, on 14.07.2010 due to divergent view in the Criminal Appeal No.764/2007 vide order dated 27.02.2008, after reference the Hon'ble Third Judge agreed with the Hon'ble Judge who had overturned the order of discharge on account of which the Hon'ble Special Judge, Pune was directed to frame the charge and proceed with the trial with the applicant. The effect of order dated 14.07.2010, the order of the Hon'ble High Court is that the criminal proceedings instituted against the applicant relates back to 03.02.2004 when SIT filed charge-sheet or atleast on 26.07.2005, when the CBI has filed the charge-sheet against the applicant by operation of law and, therefore, looking to the aforesaid chronology of the events, it can Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 be safely concluded that during intervening period between 25.03.2009 till 04.12.2010 Criminal Charge-sheet was pending against the applicant and the integrity of the applicant was doubtful which comes within the purview of anything adverse against the applicant.37 OA.339/2016
13. Further, for issuance of integrity certificate the criteria as per the rules is very wide meaning thereby a single cloud in respect of service career of SPS Officer may come in the way of such officer for award of IPS.
14. At this stage it is necessary to reproduce the relevant paragraph of the judgment of Gurpreet Singh Bhullar and Another vs. Union of India and Others, reported in (2006) 3 SCC 758, which are as under:-
"8. Mr.Soli J. Sorabjee, learned Senior Counsel, rightly contended that the whole controversy is with regard to the interpretation of Explanation 1 to Regulation 5(5) and Regulation 7(3). To appreciate the controversy in proper perspective, Regulation 5(5) and Explanation 1 are quoted below:
"5. Preparation of a list of suitable officers.-
(5) The list shall be prepared by including the required number of names first from amongst the Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document officers finally classified as 'Outstanding' then from Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 amongst those similarly classified as 'Very Good', and thereafter from amongst those similarly classified as 'Good' and the order of names inter se within each category shall be in the order of their seniority in the State Police Service:
Provided that the name of any officer so included in the list shall be treated as provisional if the State Government withholds the integrity certificate in respect of such officer or any proceedings departmental or criminal are pending against him or anything adverse against him which renders him 38 OA.339/2016 unsuitable for appointment to the service has come to the notice of the State Government:
Provided further while preparing yearwise select list for more than one year pursuant to the second proviso to sub-regulation (1), the officer included provisionally in any of the select list so prepared shall be considered for inclusion in the select list of the subsequent year in addition to the normal consideration zone and in case he is found fit for inclusion in the suitability list for that year on a provisional basis such inclusion shall be in addition to the normal size of the select list determined by the Central Government for such year.
Explanation 1.-The proceedings shall be treated as pending only if a charge-sheet has actually been issued to the officer or filed in a court as the case may be."
9. Explanation 1 as quoted above will make it crystal-clear that the proceedings shall be treated as pending only if a charge-sheet has actually been issued to the officer or filed in a court. The language employed in the statute is unambiguous. The Explanation nowhere states about charges having been framed by the trial court. The High Court, in our view, erroneously read something into the Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Explanation, which is not provided by the regulation. There Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 is no concept of charge being framed by the trial court in the context of Explanation 1 of the regulation.
10. Explanation 1 to Regulation 5(5) is further clarified in Regulation 7(3), Regulation 7 speaks of select list. Regulation 7(3) reads as under:
"7.(3) The list as finally approved by the Commission shall form the select list of the members of the State Police Service:39 OA.339/2016
Provided that if an officer whose name is included in the select list is, after such inclusion, issued with a charge-sheet or a charge-sheet is filed against him in a court of law, his name in the select list shall be deemed to be provisional."
11. A conjoint reading of Explanation 1 to Regulation 5(5) and the proviso to Regulation 7(3) speaks about the charge-sheet being filed against an officer in a court of law. There is no concept of charges being framed under the regulation.
12. In Prakash Kumar v. State of Gujarat the Constitution Bench of this Court observed in para 20 at SCC p. 423 thus:
"20. Before we proceed to consider the rigours of Sections 15 and 12 we may at this stage point out that it is a trite law that the jurisdiction of the court to interpret a statute can be invoked only in case of ambiguity. The court cannot enlarge the scope of legislation or intention when the language of the statute is plain and unambiguous. Narrow and pedantic construction may not always be given effect to. Courts should avoid a construction which would reduce the legislation to futility. It is also well settled that every statute is to be interpreted without any Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document violence to its language. It is also trite that when an Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 expression is capable of more than one meaning, the court would attempt to resolve the ambiguity in a manner consistent with the purpose of the provision, having regard to the consequences of the alternative constructions."
13. In Nasiruddin v. Sita Ram Agarwal the three- Judge Bench of this Court pointed out in paras 35 and 37 (SCC pp. 588 and 589) as under:
"35. In a case where the statutory provision is plain and unambiguous, the court shall not interpret 40 OA.339/2016 the same in a different manner, only because of harsh consequences arising therefrom.
* * *
37. The court's jurisdiction to interpret a statute can be invoked when the same is ambiguous. It is well known that in a given case the court can iron out the fabric but it cannot change the texture of the fabric. It cannot enlarge the scope of legislation or intention when the language of the provision is plain and unambiguous. It cannot add or subtract words to a statute or read something into it which is not there. It cannot rewrite or recast legislation. It is also necessary to determine that there exists a presumption that a legislature has not used any superfluous words. It is well settled that the real intention of the legislation must be gathered from the language used. It may be true that use of the expression 'shall or may' is not decisive for arriving at a finding as to whether the statute is directory or mandatory. But the intention of the legislature must be found out from the scheme of the Act. It is also equally well settled that when negative words are used the courts will presume that the intention of the legislature was that the provisions are mandatory in character."
14. In Balram Kumawat v. Union of India the three- Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Judge Bench of this Court pointed out in para 23 at SCC p. Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 635 as under:
"23. Furthermore, even in relation toa penal statute any narrow and pedantic, literal and lexical construction may not always be given effect to. The law would have to be interpreted having regard to the subject-matter of the offence and the object of the law it seeks to achieve. The purpose of the law is not to allow the offender to sneak out of the meshes of law. Criminal jurisprudence does not say so."41 OA.339/2016
And further in para 30 at SCC pp. 638-39 it was pointed out as under:
"30. Yet again in Supdt. And Remembrancer of Legal Affairs to Govt. of W.B. v. Abani Maity the law is stated in the following terms:
'19[18]. Exposition ex visceribus actus is a long-recognised rule of construction. Words in a statute often take their meaning from the context of the statute as a whole. They are therefore, not to be construed in isolation. For instance, the use of the word "may" would normally indicate that the provision was not mandatory. But in the context of a particular statute, this word may connote a legislative imperative, particularly when its construction in a permissive sense would relegate it to the unenviable position, as it were, "of an ineffectual angel beating its wings in a luminous void in vain". "If the choice is between two interpretations", said Viscount Simon, L.C. in Nokes v. Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries Ltd.
"the narrower of which would fail to achieve the manifest purpose of the Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document legislation, we should avoid a construction Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 which would reduce the legislation to futility and should rather accept the bolder construction based on the view that Parliament would legislate only for the purpose of bringing about an effective result".'"
15. The interpretation of the statute assigned by the Division Bench of the High Court as sought to be done in the present case, if accepted, would negate the intendment of the legislature and frustrate the statute itself. In fact, there is ambiguity in the statute, which would require 42 OA.339/2016 interpretation negating the intendment of the legislature as sought to be done by the High Court.
16. Filing of charge-sheet is preceded by an in- depth investigation. Charges are filed in the court when the prima facie case is established in course of the investigation. The intendment of the legislature is that a person who is charged with a criminal offence in which charge is filed in court and the case being pending for trial, that too against a police officer, the inclusion of such officer in the list shall be treated as provisional. The dangerous interpretation assigned to the statute by the High Court would negate the intendment of the legislature. In our view, the High Court has committed grave fundamental error of law and the same is unsustainable in law."
15. In view of the aforesaid observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the contention of learned counsel for the applicant is not tenable that in the intervening period there was no charge pending against the applicant.
16. So far as the contention of the applicant on the basis of the OM that none of the 3 contingencies were available during Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal Hemant Anant DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 intervening period from 25.03.2009 to 04.12.2010 is concerned when there is a specific statutory provision and which has been taken into consideration by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Gurpreet Singh Bhullar (supra). Therefore, contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is not tenable. 43 OA.339/2016
17. Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussion, no ground is made out for intervention in the present O.A. and the same is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed , with no order as to costs.
18. Pending MAs, if any, stand disposed of accordingly.
(Umesh Gajankush) (Shri Krishna)
Member (J) Member (A).
H
Digitally signed by Hemant Anant Mahabal
Hemant Anant
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=3273, OID.2.5.4.65=cd2ae49d8bf44fb5ab2d290f61a2b198, Phone= 0df695a144e63d3cd136c520255a48d230ca63775b412a272123c7dc7a126121, PostalCode= 400602, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 44ef8f218df6316dce768bd9807f522585fec3a6ac1fd6a02290960724113109, CN=Hemant Anant Mahabal Mahabal Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.03.24 17:09:01+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0