Explore a fascinating legal case where the court delves into the intricacies of promotions within the Indian Forest Service. The case involves a detailed examination of regulations, appointments, and pension benefits, showcasing the court’s nuanced legal analysis. Stay tuned to discover how the court’s decision impacts the rights and privileges of the officers involved.
Facts
- The Union of India challenged a judgment regarding promotions in the Indian Forest Service (IFS) in 1996.
- A court order dated 12 November 2007 maintained the status quo during the appeal.
- Various interlocutory applications were filed during the pending appeal.
- The appeal was against a High Court order directing adjustment of original petitioner and others to IFS cadre with pensionary benefits.
- The original petitioner was a member of State Forest Service of UP Cadre and was promoted to IFS in 1996.
- The promotions were challenged, citing violation of regulations, and were eventually quashed by the Tribunal.
- The original petitioner retired in November 1996, just after the promotions in September 1996.
- A writ petition was filed and granted by the High Court for adjustment of officers not included in review recommendations.
- The High Court order emphasized entitlement to adjustments against notional vacancies for pensionary benefits.
- 12 officers impleaded as party respondents sought benefits similar to the respondent Mr. Trilok S. Bhandari.
- Added respondents who were not promoted in the review selection committee were appointed in IFS against subsequent year vacancies except for respondent no. 13.
- Respondent no. 13 continued as a de-facto officer in the IFS cadre but retired in September 2013.
- After retirement, respondent no. 13 received provisional pension and other emoluments as a member of the IFS despite appointment being quashed.
- Appointment made by the review selection committee was not challenged, High Court exceeded its jurisdiction in granting relief.
- Officers not selected in 2005 or subsequent vacancies have no right to continue in the IFS cadre.
- Trilok S. Bhandari retired in 1996, other officers appointed in subsequent years, only respondent no. 13 left out who retired in 2013.
- Respondent no. 13 continued in IFS cadre due to interim order, pension computed on last pay drawn in IFS.
- Officers promoted based on select list need not be reverted, further continuance depends on review DPC outcome.
Also Read: Recovery of Misappropriated Temple Funds: Court’s Legal Analysis
Arguments
- Learned counsel submits that the officer has worked in the IFS cadre throughout his career and retired from service, receiving retiral benefits and provisional pension as an IFS Officer.
- Had the officer continued in the State Forest Service, he would have been entitled to promotion and assured career progression schemes.
- On seeking instructions, it was revealed that if the officer had been in the State Forest Service, his grade pay would have been lower than what he received in the IFS cadre, and he would have missed out on promotions and career progression schemes.
- It is acknowledged that the officer, who was not appointed to subsequent vacancies in the IFS cadre, would not have had a detrimental pay scale if he had remained in the State Forest Service.
- The officer has not challenged the appointments made in the IFS cadre, despite not being appointed himself.
Also Read: Determining Seniority in Delayed Appointments: Legal Analysis
Analysis
- High Court’s order was deemed unsustainable due to lack of challenge on recommendations made by review selection committee
- No justification for High Court to pass omnibus directions without proper basis
- No relevance of judgment blindly relied upon by Division Bench
- Judgment of Division Bench quashed and set aside due to unsustainability
- Officer involved in the writ petition had retired in 1996, making the High Court’s interference unwarranted
- Officer allowed to continue as a de facto member of IFS cadre; pension and benefits to be computed accordingly
- Article 142 powers used to ensure officer’s treatment as a member of IFS cadre
- Appeal found successful and allowed
Also Read: Legal Analysis in Assault and Homicide Case
Decision
- The High Court of Uttarakhand’s judgment dated 14 November, 2006 has been quashed and set aside.
- The rights and privileges of V.P. Singh, respondent no. 13, are protected as mentioned earlier.
- Any pending application(s) have been disposed of.
Case Title: UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST THROUGH THE SECRETARY Vs. TRILOK S. BHANDARI (2021 INSC 571)
Case Number: C.A. No.-006091-006091 / 2021
