K H SRINIVASAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE all these writ petitions were directed against the same judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, bangalore (for short, the Tribunal) dated 15th March, 2001 passed in o. A. No. 655 of 2000, we clubbed all the writ petitions, heard them together and they are being disposed of by this common judgment. At this stage itself, it needs to be noticed that Writ Petition No. 14842 of 2001 preferred against the same judgment of the Tribunal filed by late sri S. S. Annegowda came to be closed as having become abated vide order of this Court dated 21st August, 2003.

(2.) THE background facts leading to the filing of the Original application No. 655 of 2000 be noted in brief in the first instance and they are as follows: The fourth respondent, namely, Sri B. Kamalanabhan in Writ Petition No. 14837 of 2001 is the applicant in o. A. No. 655 of 2000 (hereinafter referred as the 'applicant'), for the sake of convenience. The applicant was initially appointed as Deputy superintendent of Police, a Group-A, Junior Scale Post in the Karnataka state Police Service (for short, 'ksps') in the year 1982. The applicant was promoted as Superintendent of Police, a Group-A, Senior Scale Post in the KSPS in the year 1991. We were told that the applicant retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31st May, 2003 at the age of 58 years.

(3.) IN exercise of the powers conferred under Section 3 of the All India services Act, 1951 (for short, 'the Act'), the Central Government has framed the Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion)Regulations, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1955 Regulations'), providing for appointment of officers from State Police Service to the ips. Regulation 2 (1) (1) defines word year as meaning the period commencing on the first day of April and ending on the 31st day of march of the subsequent year. Regulation 3 of the 1955 Regulations provides for constitution of the Committee to make selection. Sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 5 provides that the Committee shall meet at intervals not exceeding one year. Sub-regulation (2) of regulation 5 provides for the preparation of list of eligible officers thereby meaning those officers who come under zone of consideration from the State Police Service three times the number of substantive vacancies anticipated in the course of the period of 12 months. Regulation 5 (4) provides for classification of 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. Under sub-regulation (5) of Regulation 5, the Selection Committee is required to prepare the Select List.