Delhi High Court
Dr.H.L.Raskaran vs Uoi & Ors. on 2 May, 2011
Author: Pradeep Nandrajog
$~6 to 9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision :2nd May, 2011
+ W.P.(C) 799/2008
DR.H.L.RASKARAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Puneet Bajaj and Mr.Amit
Bajaj, Advocates.
versus
UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.A.S.Singh, Advoate for R-1
to R-4.
Ms.Ritu Rastogi, Advocate for
R-8.
+ W.P.(C) 800/2008
DR.S.K.SRIVASTAVA & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.Puneet Bajaj and Mr.Amit
Bajaj, Advocates.
Versus
UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.A.S.Singh, Advoate for R-1
to R-4.
Ms.Rekha Palli, Ms.Punam
Singh and Ms.Amrita Prakash,
Advocates for R-
5,6,7,8,9,10,12,15,16,18,20,
22,23 & 24.
+ W.P.(C) 803/2008
DR.SHEKHAR JAISWAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Puneet Bajaj and Mr.Amit
Bajaj, Advocates.
Versus
UOI &ORS. ..... Respondents
Page 1 of 8
Through: Mr.A.S.Singh, Advoate for R-1
to R-4.
Ms.Ritu Rastogi, Advocate for
R-6 to R-10.
+ W.P.(C) 7136/2008
DR.O.P.NIMESH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Puneet Bajaj and Mr.Amit
Bajaj, Advocates.
versus
UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Ruchir Mishra and
Mr.Mukesh Kumar, Advocates
for R-1 to R-4.
Mrs.Rekha Palli, Ms.Punam
Singh and Ms.Amrita Prakash,
Advocates for R-6.
Ms.Ritu Rastogi, Advocate for
R-8.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed
to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to Reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
JUDGMENT
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. (Oral)
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. From the inchoate pleadings in the writ petitions as also
the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the official respondents,
nothing of substance can be gathered. But with reference to
the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.5 to
10,12,15,16,18,20,22,23 & 24 in W.P.(C) No.800/2008, we
have been able to see the distinction between the head from
the tail and thus identify the issue which arises for
consideration in the above captioned writ petitions.
3. Facts are not in dispute.
4. There are 6 Central Para-military Forces in India, being:
(i) Border Security Force (BSF), (ii) Central Reserved Police
Force (CRPF), (iii) Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), (iv)
Shashtra Seema Bal (SSB), (v) Central Industrial Security
Force (CISF), and (vi) Assam Rifles (AR).
5. Medical cadre in all 6 Central Para-military Forces was
identical, notwithstanding separate Recruitment Rules being
notified by each Central Para-military Force; all of which are
admittedly pari-materia with each other.
6. At the lowest level is the post of Medical Officer (MO).
The next above post is that of Medical Officer Grade-I re-
designated as Senior Medical Officer (SMO). Promotion from
the post of Medical Officer to that of Senior Medical Officer is
not dependent upon the vacancy position. All those who had
rendered 4 years qualifying medical service as Medical Officer
were eligible to be promoted as Senior Medical Officer and the
only barrier to be crossed was to be declared fit for promotion.
Thus, it can safely be said that all Medical Officer became
eligible for promotion as Senior Medical Officer on rendering 4
years service as Medical Officer and subject to fitness are
entitled to be so promoted the moment they completed 4
years service.
7. The next above post i.e. the post above that of Senior
Medical Officer is that of the Chief Medical Officer (Ordinary
Grade) i.e. CMO (OG). Promotion to this post is also not
vacancy based. All those who had rendered 10 years service
in the medical cadre with 2 years out of 10 years in the grade
of SMO or those who had rendered service for 6 years as
Senior Medical Officer are entitled to be promoted as CMO(OG)
and since promotion was not contingent upon the vacancies,
the fitness had to be earned. In other words those who had
joined as Medical Officers, upon being certified fit for
promotion, became entitled as a matter of right to be
promoted as CMO (OG) upon having rendered 10 years
service, 2 of which years had to be as Senior Medical Officer.
8. Those who rendered service for 3 years as CMO (OG)
become eligible to be placed in the next higher post, being
that of CMO (SG) and for which, criteria was 3 years service
rendered as CMO(OG); fitness had to be obtained.
9. Further promotion was earned thereafter to the post of
DIG (Medical) and till the year 2005 there was no problem, for
the reason in each Central Para-military Force, persons used to
be placed in the next above post upon being declared fit and
whenever there was a delay in constituting the screening
boards to consider service record and certify fitness of the
candidate concerned, it hardly matter inasmuch as seniority
was protected.
10. What happened in the year 2005 was that a decision was
taken by the Cadre Controlling Ministry i.e. Ministry of Home
Affairs unifying the post of Medical Officers at the level of DIG
(Medical) that henceforth promotion to the post of DIG
(Medical) came to be effected on the basis of an integrated
seniority list of all CMO(SG) in the different Central Para
Military Forces. Obviously, an integrated seniority list of
CMO(SG) had to be prepared. The respondents did so.
11. This combined seniority list created a hurdle for the
reason, in the different Central Para-military Forces the
screening boards used to meet from time to time as per
convenience to determine the fitness of the eligible candidates
and the result was that in some Central Para-military Forces, in
particular years, persons were placed in the next above higher
grade whereas their brethren in other Central Para-military
Forces earned the same benefit on a subsequent date.
12. To illustrate what happened, we may note 10 instances
from the counter affidavit filed in W.P.(C) 800/2008 by
respondent Nos. 5 to 10,12,15,16,18,20,22,23 & 24 of said writ
petitions.
13. This highlights the issue.
14. We note in column 2 the seniority position assigned and
in column 3 the name. In column 4 we note the name of the
Central Para-military Force and in column 5 we note the date
of appointment of the respective person as a Medical Officer
and in the last column we note the date when the person
concerned was appointed as a CMO (SG). The chart reads as
under:-
Col. 1 Col.2 Col.3 Col.4 Col.5 Col.6
Sl.No. Senioriy Name Organization Date of Date of
Position appointment appointment
as M.O.
1. 82 Dr. S.D. Kiniker CRPF 05.05.1975 05.02.2002
2. 86 Dr. S.L. Nimesh CRPF 22.09.1978 05.04.2002
3. 92 Dr. Chandra CRPF 19.06.1980 05.04.2002
Bhal
4. 91 Dr. Surendra CRPF 04.07.1980 05.04.2002
Pal
5. 90 Dr. K.N. Rao CRPF 17.07.1980 05.04.2002
6. 93 Dr. K.K. Dhimre CRPF 28.02.1981 05.04.2002
7. 72 Dr. K.D. BSF 25.06.1981 06.06.2000
Sharma
8. 73 Dr. N.K. ITBP 25.06.1981 06.06.2000
Yadhuvanshi
9. 76 Dr. M.P. ITBP 25.07.1981 06.06.2000
Naharia
10. 74 Dr. A.K. Singh ITBP 15.05.1982 06.06.2000
11. 75 Dr. A.N. Jha ITBP 03.03.1983 06.06.2000
15. Suffice would it be to state that to the reader it becomes
apparent that the fortuitous circumstance of the day when the
screening boards met, to determine fitness, have resulted in
personnel in different Central Para-military Force earning a
promotion ahead of their brethren and thus reaching the
higher post a little early resulting in those who were appointed
earlier being rendered junior in the seniority list thereby
adversely affecting the chance of promotion to the post of DIG
(Medical); when the cadre gets integrated. To illustrate,
Dr.S.D.Kinker who joined CRPF as a Medical Officer on
05.05.1975 finds himself at Sl.No. 82 and Dr.K.D.Sharma who
joined BSF on 25.06.1981 finds himself 10 notches above i.e.
Sl.No.72.
16. Learned counsel for the parties jointly state that whereas
under BSF and ITBP, by and large the screening boards used to
meet regularly, with the results the medical personnel in said
two Central Para-military Forces earned promotions on the
right date, in CRPF this did not happen resulting in CRPF
personnel reaching the post of either Senior Medical Officer or
Chief Medical Officer a year or two after they became eligible.
Nobody raised an issue as this delay caused no prejudiced
since in each Central Para-military Force promotions were
effected force wise and it was only in the year 2005 when
integration took place at the level of DIG(Medical) that the
problem started pinching.
17. The rationale adopted by the official respondents is as
pleaded in paragraph 4 of the preliminary submissions in the
following words: 'That it is submitted that in order to prepare
the eligibility list for promotion as per the guidelines issued by
the Ministry, it was also mentioned that if the length of service
in the present grade is same, the date of promotion to the
immediate lower grade would be the deciding factor and so
on.'
18. It is apparent that those who fortuitously to became CMO
(SG) earlier have stolen a march notwithstanding they having
joined the cadre much later.
19. It is apparent that there is complete arbitrariness in the
action of the official respondents and thus we dispose of the
writ petitions quashing the impugned combined seniority list of
CMO (SG) and issue a direction that the list would be re-drawn
with reference to the date the incumbent joined as a Medical
Officer i.e. the lowest post in the cadre, subject to the
condition that the person concerned would lose said benefit if
at any stage while being promoted he was declared unfit in a
particular year and gained fitness in a subsequent year and
hence thereby earned a promotion.
20. Needful would be done within a period of 16 weeks from
today by drawing up a tentative seniority list within said period
and notifying all thereby inviting objections and after hearing
those who have filed objections, the final list would be finalized
within further period of 16 weeks.
21. No costs.
22. Dasti.
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J
SURESH KAIT, J
MAY 02, 2011
mr
