Through: Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, ASG with Mr. Saqib, Advocate for UOI Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate with Ms. Aditi Gupta, Advocate for UPSC.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW A.K. SIKRI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE:

1. The petitioner is a registered Trust and it is involved in the various charitable deeds and works. It has filed this public interest petition challenging the decision of the Government of India introducing the provision of Limited Competitive Examination (LCE) for recruitment of a W.P.(C)1610/2012 Page 1 of 16 limited number of IPS Officers from amongst the existing police officials working under various State Governments. This is in addition to the direct recruitment method already in vogue. The contention of the petitioner is that this is arbitrary and unconstitutional and instead the Government should increase the intake of IPS through normal course of Civil Services Examination conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). The main ground of challenge is that Ministry of Home Affairs and PMO have arbitrarily went ahead with the aforesaid method of recruitment even when it was severely criticized and it also received adverse comments not only from various States but even from UPSC as well as Ministry of Law, Govt. of India. It is thus argued that the aforesaid method of recruitment to IPS is without application of mind and is not conducive for the administrative health of the police department. The petitioner has stated in detail as to how the matter was processed and highlighted various kinds of reservations and apprehension expressed by the UPSC, Ministry of Law etc.

2. In order to appreciate the aforesaid contentions, we summoned the original record and have perused the same.

3. We find that proposal was mooted by the Ministry of Home Affairs for a Limited Competitive Examination to recruit IPS officers to meet the W.P.(C)1610/2012 Page 2 of 16 immediate shortage of personnel. It was pointed out that as on 1.1.2010, there was 4013 posts in the direct recruitment quota of the IPS Cadre of which 3383 were in place, leaving a vacancy of 630. Since cadre review has also taken place, as a consequence thereof the total authorized strength was expected to go up from 4013 to 4730 leading to additional shortage of 717 officers. Taking into account the additions on account of cadre review, the total number of vacancies in the IPS cadre, as per the note was about 1350. This underlined the urgency to find the solution to the problem. The note also indicated that there was shortage of 268 IPS officers in the CPOs such as IB, CBI, CRPF, BSF etc.

4. Shortage of IPS officers has been a major cause of concern for the Home Ministry. With the country facing internal security threats, this shortage has been felt more acutely in recent times. A Committee was constituted to go into this problem and suggest solution. This Committee known as one man Kamal Kumar Committee considered all the aspects and recommended that besides enhancing the intake through the Civil Service Examination the option of a Limited Competitive Examination for intake into the IPS to the extent of about 70 officers for a period of 7 years be resorted to. For this purpose, the Committee suggested amendment in India W.P.(C)1610/2012 Page 3 of 16 Police Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1954 for filling up of vacancies to the post of IPS through the LCE. The Scheme of LCE as proposed initially envisaged that:

Commandants in the Central paramilitary Forces, having a minimum of 5 years experience and below the age of 35 will be eligible to appear.

(ii) In lieu of the experience gained by these officers in their parent services, they will be given weightage in the matter of fixation of seniority in the IPS to the tune of minimum of 1 years and an additional 1 year for every completed four years of service.

(iii) Officers allotted the same years in this recruitment will be given inter-se seniority in order of their merit in the selection and the allotted years, these officers will be placed between RR and SPS promoted officers.

(iv) 80 posts will be filled up per year from 2010 to 2016 as per above process (while the annual number planned is 70, keeping in view the possible attrition, the number of 80 is being proposed).

Various issues connected with the LCE were also considered by the Committee. These included:-

The committee suggested solution to the aforesaid issue as well. Insofar as low pool of candidates as pointed out by the Secretary, Personnel, it was explained that the eligibility pool consist of trained and experienced officers which would ensure the quality of selected officers. Therefore, the limited number of eligible candidates should not be a matter of concern. The Committee in its detailed report pointed out following main advantages of induction through LCE:

Summary of Recommendation is contained in Chapter -10 and para 10.3 thereof suggested the recruitment plan to meet acute shortage and the portion which is relevant for our purpose is as under:-

recruited DySPs of States and their equivalent in CPOs, with a minimum of 5 years of service and below 45 years of age, and W.P.(C)1610/2012 Page 6 of 16

(iii) Appointment of professionals from specialized fields, such as IT, Communications, Finance and HR Management, on contract basis, for fixed periods or on deputation from other organizations, to release IPS officers for the jobs needing police professionals. (8) The intake through the Civil Services Examination will need to be limited to 130 in a year, in the interest of quality of training as also to avoid problems of cadre management in future."

5. The IPS being an All-India Service has a constitutional origin (part XIV, Article 312 ) and is governed by the All India Services Act, 1951 . Clause 3(1) of this law stipulates that the Central Government may after consultation with the governments of the States and by notification in the official gazette, make rules for the regulation of recruitment and the conditions of the service of persons appointed. Article 320 93 ) of the Constitution requires the UPSC to be consulted on all matters relating to methods of recruitment to civil services and for civil positions. The suggestion/proposal of the Committee were accordingly sent to the DoPT, State/Union Territories, UPSC and Ministry of Law for comments. The record shows that the matter was deliberated from time to time. As pointed out by the petitioner, no doubt, UPSC expressed certain reservations in the beginning. The UPSC termed the proposal unviable and impractical. On March, 15,2010, UPSC Secretary Alok Rawat, replying to a letter from the W.P.(C)1610/2012 Page 7 of 16 MHA said, "in the context of recruitment of officers in the Indian Police Service through limited competitive examination, the commission is of the view that the proposed LCE may not be a viable and practical proposition." The UPSC among various reasons cited for its objection to the LCE said the commission was equipped to recruit an equal number of officers through its civil services examination and there was no need for a separate recruitment process. "There appears to be no reason why the additional requirements for IPS cannot be made up through the same examination over the same period of time by increasing the vacancies for the IPS by say 70 every year," it said. It also warned the MHA of a dent to the morale of State Police Service officer beyond the age of 35, who would not be able to take a shot at the LCE. The Commission also cited the shortage of officers at all the paramilitary forces as another reason to desist from going ahead with the LCE. Above all, it added that the proposal had the potential to open a pandora's box leading to more such demands for mid career entry into the other two all India services with similar negative consequences as listed above. The State Governments, backed by their home departments, also wrote to the centre informing it of their opposition to the said recruitment method for the IPS. The Tamil Nadu government in a letter to the Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, public grievance and pension dated June 7, 2010 said, "This government is of the W.P.(C)1610/2012 Page 8 of 16 view that there is no need for a separate recruitment or lateral induction and the present system of recruitment does not require any modification." The West Bengal Government write to the government of India on August 28, 2010, "the State Government is not in favour of introduction of the scheme of Limited Competitive Examination for induction in to the IPS." So did the governments of Bihar, Nanagaland, Tripura, Karnataka, Kerala, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Goa, Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh. The All India IPS Association too made representations to the Home Minister. Even the Law Ministry that the MHA consulted was cautious in its advice.

6. The file further discloses that the matter was discussed with UPSC and improvements were made taking care of many of the concerns of UPSC. File further discloses that on various issues raised by the UPSC, Ministry of Home Affairs gave its views. Meeting between the officers of MHA and UPSC was held on 12.10.2011. Thereafter, the Secretary, UPSC addressed communication dated 14.11.2011 pointing out that proposal of MHA had been examined and certain further points were listed in this communication for further consideration by the Government before the Scheme of LCE is finalized and the rules for taking the examination is finalized. Those points raised by the UPSC were further examined and taken care of. In fact, thereafter, it is the UPSC itself which prepared draft rules for conduct of LCE which were forwarded to the MHA for having notified. These were forwarded to the MHA by the UPSC on 29.12.2011. This communication indicates that draft rules had been prepared "on consonance with the decision taken in the meeting held in the office of the Union Home Secretary on 2.12.2011. Request was made that these draft rules be perused and returned to the UPSC for final decision on the same by the Commission. This was W.P.(C)1610/2012 Page 10 of 16 followed by letter dated 13.12.2011 whereby draft application form for the conduct of LCE was also forwarded with the request to approve the same.

7. Ultimately, vide letter dated 1.3.2012, the UPSC gave its final approval. This letter reads as under:

8. Thus, finally, the UPSC has given its nod for introduction of LCE. It has even framed the rules for holding such a competitive examination and has even fixed the dates for examination. Therefore, petitioner is not right in alleging that the UPSC has objections to the conduct of LCE. The only position which is brought on record by the petitioner is half truth namely initial reservations which were in the form of certain comments and concerns to be addressed as a method of recruitment to IPS resorted to. As pointed out above, ultimately consensus has arrived. The record further shows that there is an approval of DoPT which is contained in letter dated 15.2.2012 and 22.2.2012. Likewise, the PMO has also examined the matter and given its approval. Even the Ministry of law has ultimately satisfied itself on the introduction and justification of the LCE as one of the short duration methods for holding the LCE.

9. The aforesaid sequence of events would demonstrate that before adopting this methodology of LCE as one of the methods of recruitment, not only a Committee was constituted, the recommendations of the Committee were deliberated in depth by all concerned departments. Final product in the form of approval to the system as well as rules which are notified takes into W.P.(C)1610/2012 Page 12 of 16 concerns of other departments and their nod to this methodology of recruitment.

10. This Court cannot comment as to whether the system introduced now is impeccable or there could be better alternatives. The facts taken note above, do suggest that the UPSC had initially suggested that it could recruit the same number of candidates (70 per year) through its regular Civil Services Examination by increasing its IPS vacancies and, therefore, there was no need for LCE method. No doubt, there were also the reservations on the ground that shortages of officers was there at all the para military forces and the proposal in question may open a Pandora's box leading too much more such demands for mid career entry into the other two all India services with similar negative consequences. The petitioners also expressed their apprehension that it would reduce the chance of minorities which are already underrepresented in All India Service. At the same time, the view of the Ministry was that there was an emergent need to deploy trained personnel within a short period which could be recruited through LCE. As per the government, it lacks the infrastructure to train a batch of 200 IPS recruits and, therefore, the initial suggestion of UPSC was not viable. Be as it may, as W.P.(C)1610/2012 Page 13 of 16 stated above, the matter was ultimately discussed at all levels and the UPSC, Ministry of Law etc have fallen in line.

11. The decision taken cannot be nullified by the Court or rendered invalidated merely on the ground that it is not very wise decision and there were better alternatives.

12. The manner in which posts are to be filled up including the methodology and the modalities thereof is the prerogative of the employer. Once a policy decision is taken based on expert advice and all the aspects are thrashed out, it cannot be treated as without application of mind or arbitrary. Such functions are best left for the executive and Courts should not interfere with the same.

13. The same position has been reiterated by the Apex Courts in catena of judgments. The Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and others Vs. S.L. Dutta and Anr. AIR 1991 SC 363 held as under:-

14. Likewise, emphasizing on the policy of judicial restraint, the Apex Court in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr. Vs. V. Sadanandam and Ors. AIR 1989 SC 2060 observed as under:-

14. We, thus do not find any merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed.

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW) JUDGE APRIL 25, 2012 skb W.P.(C)1610/2012 Page 16 of 16