R.L. MEENA AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

A                             R.L. MEENA AND ORS.                                      ...   ~



                                           v.
                           UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

                                SEPTEMBER 4, 2000
                                                                                      ._
B          [M. JAGANNADHA RAO AND DORAISWAMY RAJU, JJ.}


        Service Law-Indian police service-Cadre-Delhi and Andaman
  Nicobar police services-officers of-Promotion to JPS in Arunacha/, Goa,
  Mizoram and Union Territories cadre-Writ by such Officers-Seeking to be
c encadred in JPS from a retrospective date-Directions given by Supreme
  Court-Petitioners should file a detailed representation before the Central
  Government giving particulars ofpost which they consider fit to be encadred-
  Representation should also give reasons for encadrement from a retrospective
  date-Central Government should consider the representation in consultation
D with State Governments concerned and take appropriate decision pr~ferably
  within six months.

           Tamil Nadu Administrative Services Officers Ass9ciation v. Union of
    India, [2000) 3 SCALE 98, referred to.

E         CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (C) No. I35 of2000.

          (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.)

           P.P. Rao, Vikrant Yadav, Sanjay Hegde and Praveen Swarup for the
    Petitioners.
F
         Mukul Rohtagi, Additional Solicitor General, B. Krishna Prasad and T.C.
    Sharma for the Respondents.

          The following Order of the Court was deli,:ered :

          The petitioners are officers of the Indian Police Servic:! (IPS) in the
G
    Arunachal, Goa, Mizoram, Union Territories Cadre. They have all been promoted
    to the IPS from the Delhi and Andaman Nicobar Police·Services which is one         ./
                                                                                                 t
    of the feeder services to the IPS. The p1!titioners filed these petitions under
    Article 32 of the Constitution oflndia seeking the following reliefs. "Issuance
    of writ, order or direction. quashing the notifications dated 31.12.97 being
H                                        JOO                                          ......-
                             R.L. MEENA v. U.0.1.                             101
arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution       A
of India and for further directions that petitioners and all other similarly
situated All India Service Officers may be granted all the benefits with effect
from 29th April, 1985 the date of granting relief to Shri K.K. Goswami and
other officials of the Madhya Pradesh Forest Services.

      By the date this writ petition came up for hearing to this Court, this         B
Court had disposed of Writ Petition No. 613 of 1994 and batch filed by the
Tamil Nadu Administrative Services Officers Association against the Union
of India and others.

      At the time ofadmission of this writ petition on 28.7.2000 learned senior
counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are seeking a direction   C
similar tc the one issued in the Tamil Nadu Officer's case referred to above
which has since been reported in 2000 (3) SCALE 98.

      After hearing learned Additional Solicitor General for the respondents,
and the learned counsel for the petitioners, we are of the view that a similar       D
direction is to be issued in this case also. We direct as follows:

             "It is open to the petitioners to file a detailed representation to
         the Central Government, giving all the particulars of the post which
         they consider are fit to be encadred and special reasons why they
         should be encadred with a retrospective date and on such                    E
         representation being made, the Central Government will consider these
         representations in consultation with the State Government concerned,
         and take appropriate decisions in this regard preferably within six
         months from the receipt of those representations. The petitions and
         appeal are disposed of accordingly. No costs."
                                                                                     F
      The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above directions.

T.N.A.                                                     Petition disposed of.