Allowed

Sudhir Kumar and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

Delhi HC22 Jul 2024W.P.(C)/3376/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CISF paramedical personnel sought direction for cadre review, none conducted in 34 years despite DoPT OM requiring review every five years. Court held CISF's difference from other CAPFs does not absolve the obligation and directed completion of a holistic cadre review within nine months.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to carry out holistic cadre review of the CISF paramedical cadre within nine months.

Sudhir Kumar and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~23

¶2

*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI**

¶3

Date of Decision: 22.07.2024

¶4

- W.P.(C) 3376/2019 SUDHIR KUMAR AND ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber and Mr. Nikunj Arora, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents

¶8

Through: Ms. Abha Malhotra, Sr. CGC with Ms. Amrita Sony, Adv. with SI Amit Kumar and CT/GD Mohit Kumar, CISF.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR

¶11

J U D G M E N T

¶12

REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL)

¶13

The petitioners, who belong to the paramedical cadre of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents to carry out a holistic cadre review of the existing paramedical cadre in the CISF in a time bound manner.

¶14

Mr. Ankur Chhibber, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though the paramedical cadre was introduced in the CISF in 1990, the respondents have failed to carry out even a single cadre review in the last 34

¶15

Signature Not Verified

¶16

W.P.(C) 3376/2019

¶17

Digitally Signed By:NEELAM Signing Da te:2 4.07.2024 17:26:47

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

years. This, he contends, has resulted in stagnation of the petitioners whereas their counterparts in the other Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) are being granted regular promotions. He submits that as per the DoPT OMs dated 23.11.1987 which continues to hold the field the respondents are obliged to conduct a cadre review after every five years. He therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed by directing the respondents to forthwith carry out a cadre review of the paramedical cadre of the CISF.

¶20

On the other hand, Ms. Abha Malhotra, learned counsel for the respondents seeks dismissal of the writ petition by urging that the CISF cannot be compared with the other CAPFs as the CISF personnel and officers are mainly posted at peace stations. Further, the requirements of the CISF are different from that of the other CAPFs and therefore, the petitioners cannot seek any parity with the paramedic cadre of other CAPFs. She therefore, contends that once the CISF did not find any requirement to conduct a cadre review of the paramedic cadre, the petitioners have no right to insist that the cadre review must be carried out.

¶21

Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, we are unable to accept the respondents’ plea that merely because the CISF is different from other CAPFs, there is no obligation on the CISF to carry out a periodic cadre review of all the cadres in a timely manner. In this regard, reference may be made to para 3.10 in the DoPT OM dated 23.11.1987, which categorically states that the cadre review exercise may be conducted after every five years. The same reads as under:

¶22

“3.10 The cadre review exercise may be conducted after every

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

W.P.(C) 3376/2019

¶25

Digitally Signed By:NEELAM Signing Da te:2 4.07.2024 17:26:47

¶26

Page 2 of 4

¶27

five years.”

¶28

At this stage, we may also refer hereinabove to the observations of a Coordinate Bench in S.P. Singh vs. Union of India: 2015 SCC OnLine Del 6417 wherein this Court, while deciding a similar petition seeking cadre review, it was emphasised that cadre reviews must be conducted periodically.

¶29

Indisputably, this Cadre Review of Group „A‟ Service of CRPF has not taken place since the year 1996. This issue of Cadre Review has been a subject matter of discussion before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hemraj Singh Chauhan (supra), wherein the Apex Court took a view that the statutory duty which is cast on the State Government and the Central Government to undertake the Cadre Review exercise every five years is ordinarily mandatory, subject to just exceptions. The learned Apex Court went on to observe that lethargy, in-action and absence of a sense of responsibility cannot fall within the category of just exceptions. With regard to these petitioners who are Group „A‟ Officers of CRPF, the exercise of Cadre Review has not taken place for the last more than 19 years due to which a large number of officers have either retired without being promoted to higher ranks, or are likely to retire in future too suffering the same fate.

¶30

In the light of the aforesaid, we are of the considered view that even though the petitioners may not be entitled to claim parity with the paramedic staff of other CAPFs, this does not absolve the respondents of their obligation to conduct cadre review of all cadres in a timely manner. Once there is an obligation cast on the CISF under the DoPT’s OM dated 23.11.1987, the respondents cannot be permitted to urge that there is no requirement for cadre review. We may note that it is not even the respondent’s stand that this OM is not applicable to the CISF. In these

¶31

Signature Not Verified

¶32

W.P.(C) 3376/2019

¶33

Digitally Signed By:NEELAM Signing Da te:2 4.07.2024 17:26:47

¶34

Page 3 of 4

¶35

circumstances, we are of the considered view that the respondents were obliged to carry out periodical cadre review of the paramedic cadre. We, therefore, allow the writ petition by directing the respondents to carry out a holistic cadre review of the para medic cadre of the CISF within a period of nine months.

¶36

Needless to state, this Court has not expressed any opinion on the nature of the cadre review, which may be conducted by the CISF in terms of this order.

¶37

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶38

(REKHA PALLI) JUDGE

¶39

(SHALINDER KAUR) JUDGE

¶40

JULY 22, 2024 ab

¶41

Signature Not Verified

¶42

W.P.(C) 3376/2019

¶43

Digitally Signed By:NEELAM Signing Da te:2 4.07.2024 17:26:47

¶44

Page 4 of 4

Sudhir Kumar and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhir Kumar and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Touqeer Ajaz Qamar Vs Govt (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Asif Ahmed Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr. Vs Rishikesh Sharma

Bain Singh & Ors. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Vishal Sugandh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Rekha Jain Vs Union of India & Ors.

Shri Naman Kumar Vs Registrar of Delhi Skill and Entrepreneurship University and Ors.

Farida Hameed Vs Registrar of Co-Operative Societies & Anr.

Gyanendra Kumar Vs Union of India & Anr.

Suraj Kumar Pasi Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ex Insp Gd Nanda Ballabh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ravindra Yadav and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Pankaj Kumar Vs Union of India through, Secretary & Ors.

Deepak Vs Union Public Service Commission