REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

SADRE ALAM Appellant

V/S

UNION OF INDIA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

JUSTICE MORRIS IN BLUSTON AND BRAMLEY LTD. V. LEIGH [REFERRED TO]
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE V. PARLE EXPORTS P. LTD. [REFERRED TO]
R. V. WANDSWORTH LONDON BOROUGH COUNCIL,EX P,BECKWITH [REFERRED TO]
B. SRINIVASA REDDY VS. KARNATAKA URBAN WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE BOARD EMPLOYEES' ASSN. AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
SHAMBHU NATH MEHRA VS. STATE OF AJMER [REFERRED TO]
JODHA MAL KUTHIALA VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PUNJAB JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIMACHAL PRADESH AND PATIALA [REFERRED TO]
R R VERMA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
K P VARGHESE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER ERNAKULAM [REFERRED TO]
BALAGANESAN METALS VS. M N SHANMUGHAM CHETTY [REFERRED TO]
SUBRAMANIAM SHANMUGHAM VS. M L RAJENDRAN [REFERRED TO]
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE GUNTUR VS. ANDHRA SUGAR LTD [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. MAHI TRADERS:TVL INTER CONTINENTAL LEATHER TRADERS MADRAS:G N R INDUSTRIES: S A G S ARMUGHAM AND CO:PRASAD LEATHER MART:SEEMA LEATHER CO :S K S AND SONS:THIR NISAR PRIME TANNERY:C KALAYANAM:P JAYAM TRADING CORPN :T A A [REFERRED TO]
KESHAVJI RAVJI AND CO VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN METALS AND FERRO ALLOYS LIMITED CUTTACK VS. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE BHUBANESHWAR [REFERRED TO]
N SURESH NATHAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAYMOND SYNTHETICS LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SYED KHALID RIZVI OTHERS KRISHNA BEHARI SRIVASTAVA RAMESH PRASAD SINGH OTHERS VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
S S GREWAL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
P KASILINGAM VS. P S G COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY [REFERRED TO]
ALLIED MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BOMBAY VS. PODAR CEMENT PRIVATE LIMITED AND OT HERS [REFERRED TO]
DURYODHAN SAHU VS. JITENDRA KUMAR MISHRA [REFERRED TO]
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE VADODRA VS. DHIREN CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES [REFERRED TO]
MOR MODERN COOPERATIVE TRANSPORT SOCIETY LIMITED VS. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
AJAY GANDHI VS. B SINGH [REFERRED TO]
ZILE SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
DATTARAJ NATHUJI THAWARE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. ASHOK KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
NEETU VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
S B BHATTACHARJEE VS. S D MAJUMDAR [REFERRED TO]
CITIZENS FOR JUSTICE VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL VS. BALWANT SINGH CHAUFAL [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. ALOK KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
HARI BANSH LAL VS. SAHODAR PRASAD MAHTO [REFERRED TO]
GIRJESH SHRIVASTAVA VS. STATE OF MP [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH AWASTHI VS. NAND LAL JAISWAL [REFERRED TO]
AYAAUBKHAN NOORKHAN PATHAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL ELECTRICITY SUPPLY VS. DHOBEI SAHOO [REFERRED TO]
ARUN KUMAR AGRAWAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
TEHSEEN POONAWALLA VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR [REFERRED TO]
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI VS. UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present public interest litigation has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) We have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner at length. Petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 27.07.2021, whereby Inter-Cadre deputation has been granted to Respondent No.2 - Mr.Rakesh Asthana, from Gujarat Cadre to AGMUT Cadre as also extension of his service, initially for a period of one year beyond the date of his superannuation on 31.07.2021 or until further orders, whichever is earlier and his appointment as Commissioner of Police, Delhi. Challenge is also laid to the order dated 27.07.2021 whereby approval was granted by Appointments Committee of Cabinet for Inter-Cadre deputation of Respondent No. 2 as well as extension of his service beyond the age of superannuation.

(3.) Respondent No. 2 is a 1984 Batch officer of the Indian Police Services ("IPS"), Gujarat Cadre and his date of superannuation was 31.07.2021. Vide the impugned order dated 27.07.2021, Respondent No. 1 has granted Inter-Cadre deputation to Respondent No. 2 and extended his services beyond the date of superannuation. Vide the same order, Respondent No. 2 has been appointed as Commissioner of Police, Delhi. Assailing the said order, it was contended by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner that the impugned order (Annexure P-2 to the memo of this petition) has been passed in total violation of provisions of Rule 56(d) of the Fundamental Rules and Supplementary Rules (hereinafter referred to as "FR-56(d)"); All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules, 1958"); All India Services (Conditions of Service - Residuary Matters) Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules, 1960"), as well as in violation of Office Memorandum dated 08.11.2004, issued by Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Government of India, (hereinafter referred to as "DoPT").

Click here to view full judgment.

SADRE ALAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address