A. Raghu, Son Of Rajaiah vs Govt. Of A.P. & Ors

Provided that in the case of directly recruited Sub-Inspectors of Police (Intelligence) the inter se seniority shall be fixed on completion of training the Police Training College/Andhra Pradesh Police Academy, instead of at the time of selection, in accordance with the list which shall be arranged in order of merit, which shall be determined in accordance with the aggregate of marks obtained by each probationer in the tests and examinations prescribed for them in the training modules conducted at these Institutions.

The seniority of the Sub-Inspectors of Police (Intelligence) appointed by transfer from among Sub-Inspectors of Police (Civil) or equivalent ranks of this service carrying the same scale of pay shall not be treated as first appointment but shall be determined with reference to the date of his seniority in the Class or Category from which he was transferred.

2. Before venturing into the determination of the inter se seniority between the rival parties, it is necessary in the first instance, to delineate the factual position. We shall accordingly hereinafter, in the first instance, narrate the factual position, as it emerges from the pleadings, as also, from the different orders appended to the instant batch of civil appeals.

3. The Police Department of the State of Andhra Pradesh decided to fill up existing posts of Sub-Inspector of Police by way of direct recruitment. The Andhra Pradesh State Level Recruitment Board (hereinafter referred to as, the Recruitment Board) undertook the aforesaid exercise by issuing a notification dated 22.1.1991. As per the said notification, 470 posts of Sub-Inspector, in 7 different zones were sought to be filled up. The process of selection from amongst eligible candidates, was to be based on a physical test followed by a written test and an interview. Having concluded the aforesaid selection process, lists of provisionally selected candidates were prepared on the basis of their inter se merit in the selection process, for each of the 7 zones. While disposing of the present controversy, we have chosen to pass a common order, wherein we shall take into consideration the vacancies sought to be filled up for Zone V (Warangal range). In this behalf, it would be relevant to mention here, that the office of the Director General & Inspector General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, issued a communication dated 11.4.1991/7.5.1991 indicating the names of provisionally selected candidates for Zone V (Warangal range). A list of candidates was attached to the aforesaid communication, depicting the provisional list of selected candidates for the above range. This list comprised of 38 names from the open category, 5 names from the backward class 'A' category, 7 names from the backward class 'B' category, 1 name from the backward class 'C' category, 5 names from the backward class 'D' category, 11 names from the scheduled castes category, 4 names from the scheduled tribes category, 2 names from the ex-servicemen category, 6 names from among the police executives, 1 name from the ministerial service, and 1 name from amongst the sportsmen.

4. On 12.7.1991, the afore-stated candidates were directed to report for training. Only 58 of the selected candidates, however, reported for training. The rest of the candidates did not join for a variety of reasons. It is not a matter of dispute, that there are two police training colleges in the State of Andhra Pradesh, and accordingly, the afore-stated selected candidates were deputed for training to the said two training colleges. The order dated 12.7.1991 vide which the short-listed candidates were deputed for training reveals, that the candidates were placed on probation from the date of joining the police training college(s). The training would continue for a period of nine months followed by practical training for one year and three months, including holding independent charge of a police station for not less than nine months. The said training was to commence from 16.7.1991.

5. All the 58 selected candidates except one Munuswamy, successfully completed their training. Insofar as Munuswamy is concerned, he did not participate in the examination at the end of the training, due to personal reasons. Munuswamy was allowed to enroll himself for training along with a batch of candidates who were deputed for training on 14.6.1992. Munuswamy also completed his training with the said subsequent batch of candidates, in 1993.

6. It is relevant to mention, that in the statutory provision regulating appointments against the cadre of Sub-Inspectors of Police, 50% of the posts are earmarked to be filled up by way of direct recruitment, 30% of the posts are to be filled up by promotion from Head Constables, 7% from amongst police executives (hereinafter referred to as, PE) out of the Constables and Head Constables, 4% from police ministerial staff (hereinafter referred to, as PM), 2% from sportspersons (hereinafter referred to as, SP), not more than 5% by way of transfer from Reserve Sub- Inspectors (from Armed Reserve/Andhra Pradesh Special Police) and 2% by way of appointment under special circumstances, on compassionate grounds.

8. In obedience to the aforesaid directions, after recalculating the vacancies for PE, PM and SP quotas, additional names of candidates were sent for training. These candidates commenced their training on 14.6.1992. They completed their training in 1993. It is pertinent to record here, that the candidate whose training was deferred, namely, Munuswamy, and the candidates whose names were short-listed for training in furtherance of the directions issued by the Administrative Tribunal vide order dated 30.7.1991 (passed in Original Application no. 29957 of 1991), commenced the course of training simultaneously on 14.6.1992.

16. We will venture to determine the controversy in hand, by adopting a three-step consideration process. We shall thereupon record our conclusion.

Consideration, Two:

Consideration, Three:

21. For the reasons recorded hereinabove, we find no merit in the instant civil appeals. The same are accordingly dismissed.

March 26, 2015.

[HEARD BY HON'BLE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR AND HON'BLE S.A.BOBDE,JJ.] Date : 26/03/2015 These appeals were called on for judgment today.

For Appellant(s) Mr. P. Vinay Kumar,Adv.

Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.A. Bobde.

For the reasons recorded in the Reportable judgment, which is placed on the file, the appeals are dismissed.