UNION OF INDIA Vs. SYED ASHIQ HUSSAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal, filed by the Union of India, is directed against the judgment passed by the learned Writ Court dated 27th of October, 2017, in SWP No. 420/2016, whereby the petition of the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein was allowed.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the instant appeal, as these stem out from a study of the file under consideration, are that the Government Order No. Home-508 (P) of 2010 dated 29th of April, 2010, wherein the name of the writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein figured at S. No. 212 in the list of the Superintendents of Police, was challenged by the writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein before the learned Single Bench and in terms of judgement dated 4th of January, 2013, the learned Single Bench, while allowing the writ petition, accepted the claim of the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 and directed the respondents to fix and determine his seniority as Superintendent of Police from the date he joined as Incharge SP (Operations) in terms of PHQ Order No. 2002 of 1998 dated 24th of June, 1998. In compliance of the orders of the learned Single Bench, the respondents issued Government Order No. Home-378 of 2013 dated 5th of September, 2013, in terms whereof sanction was accorded to the promotion of the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein as Superintendent of Police w.e.f 24th of June, 1998 followed by another Order No. 379 of 2013 dated 5th of September, 2013, directing the placement of the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein at S. No. 1-A, i.e. below Shri Ghulam Hassan Bhat (S. No. 1) and above Shri Syed Kifayat Hyder (S.No.2) in the final seniority list as on 1st of January, 2010. Subsequent to the placement of the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 at the appropriate place, he was required to be inducted into Indian Police Service (IPS) in terms of IPS (Appointment by promotion) Regulation, 1955, for the allotment year 2006. It is pleaded that the judgement of the learned Single Bench was challenged before this Court by medium of a Letters Patent appeal, being LPA No. 156/2013, which was dismissed by this Court. Subsequently, as stated, the Supreme Court also upheld the judgement of the Single Bench, as a corollary to which the State of Jammu and Kashmir/ respondent No.2 herein recommended the case of the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs/appellant herein for induction into IPS for the allotment year 2006 in terms of communication No. Home/SWP/GAZ/22/2013 dtd. 19/9/2013. After laying their hands on all the requisite documents, the appellants issued another notification dated 20th of January, 2016, appointing the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein to the Indian Police Service on probation and allocating him to J&K Cadre under Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 5 of IPS (Cadre) Rules, 1954. The said notification was issued in continuation to the notification dated 18th of March, 2011, however, the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 was held entitled to all notional benefits with respect to that of his immediate junior. It is also stated that on the basis of his date of birth, the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 retired from service by the end of February, 2013, on attaining the age of 58 years. However, after his induction into IPS, the State of Jammu Kashmir/ respondent No.1 issued a series of Government Orders dtd. 26/2/2016, vide which sanction was accorded to the placement of the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein in the Junior Administrative Grade of IPS, placement of the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 in the selection grade of IPS, promoting the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 to the rank of super time scale DIG and according sanction to the adjustment of the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 against the available vacancy of DIG (Administration) PHQ till his retirement on superannuation on 29th of February, 2016. Feeling aggrieved, the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein approached the Single Bench of this Court through the medium of writ petition registered as SWP No. 420/2016, stating therein that the treatment meted out to him was based on hostile discrimination inasmuch as the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in the writ petition/ appellants herein, while dealing with a similar situation in the case of Shri Prabhat Singh, issued Government Order No. Home-101 (P) of 2013 dated 11th of March, 2013 and in terms of the said Government Order, the respondent No.4/ appellant herein ordered release of monetary benefits in favour of Shri Prabhat Singh after his retirement as were admissible to him by virtue of his induction into the IPS. The Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein also pleaded that the said order was issued by the State of Jammu and Kashmir in partial modification of Government Order No. Home-43 (P) of 2013 dated 4th of February, 2013 in terms of the judgement dated 31st of May, 2011, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal. On the above set of facts, the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein had averred that the treatment meted out to him was violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The learned Single Bench, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on consideration of the matter, vide judgment dated 27th of October, 2017, allowed the petition of the Writ petitioner/ respondent No.1 herein, operative portion whereof reads as under:

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the record and considered the matter.