IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2008 / 20TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 13092 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ G.M.KUMAR HC/GD, NO.7332301677, CISF UNIT VSSC, THUMBA, DETT. REPLACE, VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.SASIDHARAN CHEMPAZHANTHIYIL SRI.S.VISHNU RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, CISF, BLOCK NO.13, CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI. 2. THE COMMANDANT, CISF UNIT NLC NEYVELI, NEYVELI, CUDDALORE DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU. 3. THE COMMANDANT, CISF UNIT, VSSC, THUMBA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 13092 of 2008 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE MOVEMENT ORDER DATED 24.2.06 ISSUED BY THE ASST.COMMANDANT, CISF UNIT, NLC NEYYELI. EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE MOVEMENT ORDER DATED 18.12.06 ISSUED BY THE COMMANDANT, CISF UNIT, VSSC THUMBA EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.E-42011/CISF/NLC/ ADM.2/ACPs/2006-13374 DTED 10.11.06 OFTHE THIRD RESPONDENT EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM NO.F- 27018/CISF/VSSC/ACCTS/REC.OP/07/9511 DATED 22.11.07 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.12.07 IN W.P.(C). 36460/2007 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMISSION DTED 19.12.07 TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXT.P7- TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 5.12.06 IN W.P. (C).7497 OF 2004 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT EXT.P8- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.E-42099/12/09/Estt.I/55 DATED 17.3.08 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT EXT.R3(a)- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.776 DATED 25.7.00 EXT.R3(b)- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.1353 DATED 7.11.03 (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, J ------------------- W.P.(C).13092/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Head Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force. In this writ petition, petitioner challenges Ext.P4 Office memorandum dated 22.11.2007 directing recovery of the benefits paid to him under the Assured Career Progression Scheme, hereinafter referred to as the “ACP Scheme” for short, and Ext.P8 order passed by the Director General of Central Industrial Security Force rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner therefrom. The ACP Scheme was introduced with effect from 9.8.1999 in the light of the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission with a view to ameliorate the problems of stagnation and resultant hardship faced by Central Government employees due to lack of adequate avenues for promotion. One of the conditions for placement in the ACP Scheme is that the employee while accepting the said benefit shall be deemed to have given his unqualified acceptance for regular promotion on occurrence of vacancy in the higher post subsequently. W.P.(C).13092/2008 2 Another condition is fulfilment of the norms for promotion like passing of departmental examinations. As per the Central Industrial Security Force (Subordinate) Service Recruitment Rules, 1999, which came into force on 4.2.2000, employees of the Central Industrial Security Force have to pass the Promotion Cadre Course (“PCC” for short) to enable them to get promotion to higher post. On the terms of the ACP Scheme, the petitioner was bound to pass the PCC so as to enable him to get the benefit of placement in the ACP Scheme. 2. The petitioner was placed in the ACP Scheme even before he passed the PCC. This was in the year 2000, shortly after the ACP Scheme was introduced. The petitioner was first deputed for the PCC by Ext.P1 movement order dated 24.2.2006. He was not successful in completing the PCC in the first chance. He was again deputed to undergo the PCC by Ext.P2 movement order dated 18.12.2006. Even before he W.P.(C).13092/2008 3 underwent the PCC, by Ext.P3 order dated 10.11.2006, his placement in the ACP Scheme was cancelled for the reason that he did not pass the PCC. By Ext.P4, the benefits given to him were ordered to be recovered in instalments from his salary commencing from December, 2007. The petitioner challenged Exts.P3 and P4 in W.P. (C).36460 of 2007. By Ext.P5 judgment dated 11.12.2007, this Court disposed of the said writ petition with a direction that if the petitioner files an appeal before the Director General of the Central Industrial Security Force within one month, the said appeal shall be disposed of within four months thereafter. It was further ordered that recovery pursuant to Ext.P4 will be kept in abeyance till the appeal is disposed of. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in Ext.P5 judgment, the petitioner filed Ext.P6 appeal. In Ext.P7 judgment, a learned Single Judge of this Court had taken the view that in view of the Circular dated 19.10.2005, issued by the Director General of the CISF, all personnel in the CISF are entitled to avail four chances to successfully W.P.(C).13092/2008 4 complete the PCC. Ext.P7 judgment was upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.2633 of 2007 and connected cases. By Ext.P8 order passed on 17.3.2008, the appeal filed by the petitioner from Exts.P3 and P4 was rejected on the short ground that he did not pass the Promotion Cadre Course in the first chance. 3. I have heard Sri.Vishnu S.Chempazhanthiyil, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.Parameswaran Nair, Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents. In view of the binding decision of this Court to which respondents herein are parties, it cannot be disputed that personnel of the CISF are entitled to avail four chances to successfully complete the PCC. The averments in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents indicate that the placement of the petitioner in the ACP Scheme was cancelled and recovery of the benefits was ordered on the short ground that he failed to qualify in the PCC in the first chance. It is evident from the Circular dated W.P.(C).13092/2008 5 19.10.2005, referred to in Ext.P7 judgment and also in the judgment in Writ Appeal No.2633 of 2007 and connected cases, that personnel of the CISF are entitled to avail four chances to complete the PCC. Ext.P3 discloses that placement of the petitioner in the ACP Scheme was cancelled shortly after he failed to qualify in the first chance and three weeks before he was deputed for the PCC on the second occasion. It is not in dispute that the petitioner passed the PCC in the second chance. In the light of the Circular dated 19.10.2005, the stand taken by the respondents in Exts.P3, P4 and P8 cannot be sustained. Withdrawal of the benefits granted to the petitioner under the ACP Scheme and the petitioner's placement in the ACP Scheme were cancelled on the short ground that he did not pass the PCC in the first chance. The said stand of the respondents is untenable and cannot be sustained in the light of the Circular dated 19.10.2005, and the judgment in Writ Appeal No.2633 of 2007 and connected cases wherein Ext.P7 was upheld. In the result, Exts.P3, P4 W.P.(C).13092/2008 6 and P8 are quashed. The respondents are directed to restore the benefits granted to the petitioner under the ACP Scheme. If any amount has been recovered from the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P4, it shall be refunded to him. This shall be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is allowed as above. No costs. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge mrcs