RANGANATHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We are distressed to note that the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench is labouring under a misapprehension that they are bound by the Full Bench decision of the Tribunal rather than a decision rendered by learned Single Judge of this Court. We may extract the operative portion of the order of the Tribunal which is as follows:

(2.) Petitioner herein retired as the Superintendent of Police on 31.5.1996. He approached the Tribunal aggrieved by the rejection of his claim for inclusion in the select list for the year 1993-94 prepared for promotion to Indian Police Service. He submitted that he was notionally promoted as Dy. S.P. with effect from 26.3.1983 and therefore had completed eight years of continuous service in the post of Dy. S.P. on 26.3.1991 and consequently he was eligible for consideration for inclusion in the select list of 1990-91. According to him, even if the period of his notional promotion was not considered even then he was eligible for inclusion in the select list of 1993-94 as he had completed eight years of continuous service on 1.4.1994 i.e., his date of actual appointment as Dy. S.P. being 21.2.1986. With regard to his first contention it was pointed out by the respondents before the Tribunal that even though he was notionally promoted as Dy. S.P. on 26.3.1983 and as such he had completed 8 years of continuous service in the post of Dy. S.P. on 26.3.1991 the said notional service cannot be considered for appointment to the post of Indian Police Service. Reference was made to the R.5(2) of the Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955. It was further pointed out before the Tribunal that the Full Bench of the Tribunal, Mumbai in O.A. 532/97 has considered the question whether for the purpose of third proviso to Regulation.5(2) of the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 the service of Dy. S.P. be taken into consideration. Full Bench took the view that the period of notional promotion or deemed promotion cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose of eligibility for being inducted into IPS under R.5(2).

(3.) With regard to second contention raised by the petitioner that he had completed eight years of continuous service on 1.4.1994 is eligible for consideration for inclusion in the select list of 1993-94 it was pointed by the respondents before the Tribunal that in terms of the statutory provisions of the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955, as applicable at the relevant point of time the select list of 1993-94 was prepared by taking into consideration the eligibility conditions as on 1.4.1993. It was pointed out that the petitioner was actually promoted as Dy.S.P. with effect from 21.2.1986 and thus he had completed eight years of continuous service in the post of Dy. S.P. on 22.2.1994. Consequently he was not eligible for consideration on the crucial date i.e., 1.4.1993 for preparation of 1993-94 select list.