Rajiv Ranjan vs Union Of India

L. Narasimha Reddy, J

The applicant is an IPS officer of 2002 batch of AGMUT cadre. Over the period, he earned promotions upto the level of DIGP Grade. His batch of

officers are entitled to be considered for promotion to the grade of IG w.e.f. 01.01.2020. DPC for this purpose met on 26.12.2019. The case of the

applicant was also included in the list of officers forwarded to the DPC for the purpose of promotion. However, DCP deferred the consideration of

the applicant by referring to certain events and observations of CVC. This OA is filed challenging the action of the respondents in not considering the

case of the applicant for promotion to the post of IG and for a direction to the respondents to convene a review DPC for this purpose and to extend

him the benefits w.e.f. 01.01.2020.

The applicant contends that he did not face any disciplinary proceedings or criminal proceedings in his career, much less he was placed under

suspension. According to him certain observations were made by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in a criminal appeal pertaining to the violence that

took place in the year 1984 on the eve of death of former Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi and the CVC has made remarks in that behalf. He

submits that as long as the factors mentioned by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgement of Union of India vs. Janaki Raman do not exists,

the question of his not being not considered does not arise. He also submits that even where an officer faces the factors referred above, the sealed

cover procedure is adopted, and deferring his case, is something unknown to law.

The respondents filed a counter affidavit. It is stated that the applicant functioned as Investigating Officer in certain cases referable to the said

incident, and he has clubbed certain FIRs and committed several lapses in the context of investigations, and that the same was adversely commented

by the Hon’ble High Court. It is stated that the CVC took note of the comments and the proceedings are under contemplation against the

applicant. According to them, the DPC has also taken the same into account.

We heard Sh.Ajesh Luthra, learned counsel for the applicant with Sh.Jatin Parashar, learned Senior Counsel and Sh.R.K.Jain, learned counsel for

the respondents.

It is not in dispute that the applicant has become otherwise eligible, to be considered for promotion to IG level w.e.f. 01.01.2020. The DPC met well

in advance on 26.12.2019 and the name of the applicant figured in the list of the officers forwarded to it. However, the DPC deferred the

consideration of the applicant by stating the following reasons.

The Selection Committee was also informed that :

(i) Sh.Rajiv Ranjan, IPS (AGMUT : 2002) : CBI furnished a self contained Note in the Case RC RCS(S)/2012/CBI.SC-I/New Delhi pointing

out several lapses on the part of Sh.Rajiv Rajan, the then ACP and other police officials of Delhi Police in handling riot cases in the area of

PS Nareala, Delhi, which took place following assassination of Smt. Indira Gandhi. The matter was examined by UT Division in

consultation with Delhi Police and Chairman (SIT), Anti Sikh Riot cases and with the approval of Hon’ble Home Minister, it was

decided to close the case against Sh.Rajiv Ranjan. Thereafter, the matter was referred to CVC for advice in the matter, CVC vide its OM

dated 01.02.2019 observed that there is clear misconduct on the part of Shri Rajiv Ranjan and advised major penalty proceedings against

him under AIS Rules. Since then, the matter is under examination for exploring further course of action.

(ii) Para 11.1 of the guidelines issued by IPS-II vide letter dated 15.01.1999 for promotion of IPS officers to the various grades, stipulates

that “the integrity certificate would be withheld only in cases where one or other contingencies as indicated in Para 11.1 supra has

arisenâ€​, i.e.

(a) Officers under suspension.

(b) Officers is respect of whom a charge-sheet has been issued and the disciplinary proceedings are pending

(c) Officers in respect of whom protection for the criminal charge is pending.

(iii) Further DoP&T OM No.22034/4/2012-Estt(D) dated 02.11.2012 provides that where it becomes essential in respect of officers in whose

case disciplinary proceedings are contemplated or pending and are included in consideration zone for promotion, necessary action be

taken for placing the proposal before the DPC so that vigilance clearance is not allowed as per conditions mentioned in para

(ii) above.

(iv) As per extent provisions, the integrity of all the officers mentioned at Para 3 above is certified (Except Shri Rajiv Ranjan, (AGMUT-

2002).

(v) No disciplinary proceedings/criminal/Under Suspension case are pending/contemplated against any of the officers mentioned at para 3

above (Except Shri Rajiv Ranjan, (AGMUT-2002)

(vi) No penalty has been imposed/contemplated on any of the officers mentioned at Para 3 above (Except Shri Rajiv Ranjan, (AGMUT-

2002)

(vii) No adverse remarks in the ACRs/PARs of the officers mentioned at Para 3 above are pending communication/expunction.

(viii) There is no direction from the Court of law having any bearing on the promotion to IGIP grade.

(ix) The officers mentioned at Sl.No.01, 02, 03, o4, 06 namely Shri Sanjay Kumar Jain, Shri Chukhu Apa, Shri Tusar Taba, Shri Apur Bitin,

Shri Om Prakash Mishra of Para-3 above have completed MCTP Phase-IV Training.

(x) The officers mentioned at Sl.No.(5), (7), (8) & (9) above [namely Sh.Rupinder Kumar, Sh. Suvashis Choudhary, Brijesh Kumar Singh &

Rajiv Ranjan respectively], are retiring from service within three years. As per IPS (Pay) Rules 2007, a member of the Service, who has less

than 03 years of service, after the year in which he has been slotted to undergo MCTP Phase-IV Training, would not be sent for Mandatory

Mid-career training. Therefore, these officers are exempt from MCTP-IV training.

(xi) The IPS officers of 2001 batch was granted IGP Grade w.e.f. 01.01.2019.

Against the name of the applicant they observed “deferredâ€, 8 officers, who were all seniors to the applicant were declared as “fit†for

promotion.

The law as regards the consideration of the cases of officers for promotion and the one for following the sealed cover procedure is fairly well

settled. InJanaki Raman’s, case Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the mere pendency of disciplinary or criminal proceedings are the fact that

an officer is under suspension would not constitute the basis for not considering his case for promotion, if he is otherwise eligible. It was directed that

the matters of this nature, the cases of the officers, who are facing such proceedings must be considered, but the result thereof shall be kept in sealed

cover. The DOPT has also issued OM dated 14.09.1992 and 02.11.2012indicating the manner in which the cases of the officers facing any

proceedings are to be dealt with by the DPC.

Admittedly, the applicant herein is not placed under suspension, nor any disciplinary or criminal proceedings are pending against him. The fact that

the CVC has indicated some action, or that the Government is contemplating action against the applicant, cannot relegate him to a position worse than

the one who is under suspension or is facing departmental or criminal proceedings. Therefore, we find that the DPC was not justified in deferring the

case of the applicant from consideration.

We therefore, allow the OA and direct that the respondents shall constitute a review DPC for consideration of the applicant for promotion to the

level of IG w.e.f. 01.01.2020 and take further steps in accordance with law, preferably before the regular DPC for next batch of officers of IG takes

place.

There shall be no order as to costs.