TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 1973
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er to the IPS by notionally treating such appointment with effect from the date of notification, i.e., 5.5.2009, and also by giving appropriate place of seniority to the first Respondent amongst the private Respondents. 2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are: The first Respondent (contesting Respondent) was appointed as Deputy Superintendent of Police in the State of Tamil Nadu; she joined for duties on 26.05.1997; she was promoted as Superintendent of Police on 10.06.2006 and has worked at different places on the said post. In the seniority list of State Police Service (for short 'SPS') Officers, the first Respondent, at the given point of time, stood at serial No. 11. Since the fourth person in the seniority list was over-aged, the first Respondent was effectively considered at serial No. 10 in the seniority list for the purpose of this case. For the year 2008, there were ten vacancies for SPS to the Indian Police Service (for short, 'IPS'), which is an All India Service. The appointment by promotion to the IPS is governed by the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Regulations'). The zone of cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eparate recruitment Rules have been framed for the IAS/IPS/IFS. In pursuance of Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 9 of the IPS (Recruitment) Rules, 1954, the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 have been framed. The method of appointment is provided in Regulation 5, which reads thus: 5. PREPARATION OF A LIST OF SUITABLE OFFICERS: 5(1) Each Committee shall ordinarily meet every year and prepare a list of such members of the State Police Service as are held by them to be suitable for promotion to the Service. The number of members of the State Police Service to be included in the list shall be determined by the Central Government in consultation with the State government concerned, and shall not exceed the number of substantive vacancies as on the first day of January of the year in which the meeting is held, in the posts available for them under Rule 9 of the Recruitment Rules. The date and venue of the meeting of the Committee to make the selection shall be determined by the Commission; Provided that no meeting of the Committee shall be held, and no list for the year in question shall be prepared when; a. there are no substantive vacancies as on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., subject to the condition that such officers shall be eligible for consideration if they have completed not less than four years of actual continuous service, on the 1st day of January of the year for which the Select List is prepared, in the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police or in any other post or posts declared equivalent thereto by the State Government. EXPLANATION: The powers of the State Government under the third proviso to the Sub-Regulation shall be exercised in relation to the members of the State Police Service of constituent State, by the Government of that State. 5(2)(A) Deleted. 5(3) The Committee shall not consider the cases of the members of the State Police Service who have attained the age of 54 years on the first day of January of the year for which the Select List is prepared: Provided that a member of the State Police Service whose name appears in the Select List prepared for the earlier year before the date of the meeting of the Committee and who has not been appointed to the service only because he was included provisionally in that Select List shall be considered for inclusion in the fresh list to be prepared by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n any of the Select List so prepared shall be considered for inclusion in the Select List of subsequent year in addition to the normal consideration zone and in case he is found fit for inclusion in the suitability list for that year on a provisional basis such inclusion shall be in addition to the normal size of the select list determined by the Central Government for such year. EXPLANATION I: The proceedings shall be treated as pending only if a charge-sheet has actually been issued to the officer or filed in a Court as the case may be. EXPLANATION II: The adverse thing which came to the notice of the State Government rendering him unsuitable for appointment to the service shall be treated as having come to the notice of the State only if the details of the same have been communicated to the Central Government and the Central Government is satisfied that the details furnished by the State Government have a bearing on the suitability of the officer and investigation thereof is essential. 5 (6) Omitted. 5 (7) Deleted. 6. Ms. Binu Tamta, learned Counsel representing the Appellant herein, while taking us to the material on record, submits that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....process of selection, and importance and primacy was given to merit. The categorisation of meritorious candidates is done on the basis of service records including Confidential Character Roll as mentioned by senior officers holding high positions. He further contended that it cannot be said now-a-days, if one is aware of the facts and currents of life, that simply because categorization and judgment of the service records of officers are in the hands of senior officers, it is a sufficient safeguard. There has been considerable erosion in the intrinsic sense of fairness and justice in some of the senior officers. From instances of the conduct of many, some of the senior officers and men in high position, it cannot be said that such thinking on the subject of erosion is not wholly unjustified. Selection on merits confers wide discretion on the authority making the selection, and in the absence of reasons there would be no objectivity, and the members of the State Civil Service might receive discriminatory treatment by the Selection Committee. On these, among other things, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 8. This Court in the case of R.S. Dass v. Union of India (supra) has ob....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9;, 'Very Good', 'Good' or 'Unfit' as the case may be on an overall relative assessment of their service records (i.e. ACRs and the documents kept therein by the competent authority). For making an overall relative assessment, the committee will not depend solely on the grading recorded by the reporting/reviewing/accepting authority but will make its independent assessment of the service records of the eligible officers as per the procedure indicated below. 3.1 The Selection Committee would go through the service records of each of the eligible officers, with special reference to the performance of the officer during the last five years, preceding the year for which the Select List is prepared and after deliberation will record the assessment of the Committee in the Assessment Sheet comprising the Assessment Matrix [Officer x Year-wise assessment] and the column for Overall Assessment of the officers. 3.2 As the crucial date for preparation of the Select List is 1st January of the year of the Select List, the ACRs upto the year ending 31st March (where ACRs are written on a financial year-wise basis) or 31st December (where ACRs are written....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....racteristics are reflected in at least four of the ACRs for the last five years including the ACR for the last year (i.e. upto the preceding year for which the Select List is prepared) provided he is graded at least "Good" in the ACR of the remaining year. While grading an officer as "Outstanding", the following indicative guidelines would be observed. (i) Whilst the overall grading in the ACRs will have its relevance, however, in order to have a final view, it will be essential to carefully peruse and assess all the individual attributes/columns in the ACRs like, Work Performance, Targets Achieved, Supervision, Managerial capabilities, personality traits etc. before the Committee decides to grade an officer as 'Outstanding'. (ii) Thus, there should be an in-depth analysis of the performance of the officer before he is rated as 'Outstanding'. There should also be consistency in the grading given by different Committees in different years. (iii) Considering the fact that such 'Outstanding' officers are going to supersede other officers, there is a greater need to ensure that such an officer has met the stringent norms of being grade....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as the crucial date for reckoning the eligibility of the officers is 1st January of the select list year, the Annual Confidential Reports up to the year ending 31st March of the year preceding the year of selection list are to be taken into account. Para 4.1 prescribes the procedure for assessment. The said guideline mandates that the Selection Committee shall go through all the relevant records and make its assessment after deliberating on the quality of the officer as indicated in various columns in the Annual Confidential Reports, and then finally arrive at the conclusion. Para 4.2 specifies that the Selection Committee would not be guided merely by the overall grading in the Annual Confidential Report, but would make its own assessment on the basis of all entries in the Annual Confidential Report, because sometimes the overall grading in an ACR may be inconsistent with the grading under various parameters or attributes. This virtually means that the Selection Committee will not act as a post office but will take a decision on due application of mind. Para 4.4 mentions the overall assessment/categorisation of officers. It states that while finalising the overall assessment of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ulations 6 and 6A, the State Government and the Central Government are required to furnish their observations on the recommendations of the Selection Committee. After taking into consideration the observations of the State Government and the Central Government and the requisite records received from the State Government or the Central Government, the Commission will take a final decision on the recommendations of the Selection Committee with or without modifications in terms of the provisions of Regulation 7. Appointments to the IPS are made from the select list by the Government of India (Ministry of Home Affairs). From the afore-mentioned, it is clear that complete procedure is prescribed for selection and appointment to the IPS cadre from the SPS. 10. As mentioned supra, it is the contention of the first Respondent that the Selection Committee ought to have graded her as "Outstanding" or at least "Very Good", on an overall relative assessment of her service records, and consequently she would have been selected for the year 2008. It is her further contention that on a comparative assessment of her service records with those of the private Respondents, who were junior to her, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ared as per para 3.1 of the Guidelines. Accordingly, only the Annual Confidential Reports of five years upto the year ending 31st March, 2007 are relevant i.e. Annual Confidential Reports from 01.04.2002 to 31.03.2007 needed to be taken into account at the time of selection. The same was being done by the Selection Committee in the matter on hand. Hence, no fault can be found. It seems that the CAT, as well as the High Court, has misdirected in coming to the wrong conclusion that Annual Confidential Reports from 1.4.2003 to 31.03.2008 ought to have been taken into consideration inasmuch as such conclusion is against the Regulations & the Guidelines. 13. The CAT and the High Court have mainly relied on the grading given in the Annual Confidential Reports of the officers at the State level while coming to their conclusion. But, in terms of the Regulations and the Guidelines framed therein, for categorising the officers, the Selection Committee was required to consider the overall relative assessment of the service records of each of the eligible officers. The Selection Committee is not guided merely by the grading recorded in the Annual Confidential Reports but makes its own asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n Committee and as the Selection Committee members have got expertise in the matter, it is not open for the Courts generally to interfere in such matters except in cases where the process of assessment is vitiated either on the ground of bias, mala fides or arbitrariness. It is not the function of the Court to hear the matters before it treating them as appeals over the decisions of the Selection Committee and to scrutinise the relative merit of the candidates. The question as to whether a candidate is fit for a particular post or not has to be decided by the duly constituted expert body, i.e., the Selection Committee. The Courts have very limited scope of judicial review in such matters. We are conscious of the fact that the expert body's opinion may not deserve acceptance in all circumstances and hence it may not be proper to say that the expert body's opinion is not subject to judicial review in all circumstances. In our constitutional scheme, the decision of the Selection Committee/Board of Appointment cannot be said to be final and absolute. Any other view will have a very dangerous consequence and one must remind oneself of the famous words of Lord Acton "Power ten....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... with the State Government's decision. It is relevant to note that no allegations of malice or bias are made by the first Respondent at any stage of the proceedings against the Selection Committee or the UPSC. This Court has repeatedly observed and concluded that the recommendations of the Selection Committee cannot be challenged except on the ground of mala fides or serious violation of the statutory rules. The courts cannot sit as an appellate authority or an umpire to examine the recommendations of the Selection Committee like a Court of Appeal. This discretion has been given to the Selection Committee only, and the courts rarely sits as a Court of Appeal to examine the selection of a candidate; nor is it the business of the Court to examine each candidate and record its opinion. Since the Selection Committee constituted by the UPSC is manned by experts in the field, we have to trust their assessment unless it is actuated with malice or bristles with mala fides or arbitrariness. 17. In the case of Union of India v. A.K. Narula reported in (2007) 11 SCC 10, this Court in similar circumstances observed thus: 15. The guidelines give a certain amount of play in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tee for making their assessment and it is not subject to appeal. Taking the overall view of ACRs of the candidates, one may be held to be very good and another may be held to be good. If this type of interference is permitted then it would virtually amount that the Tribunals and the High Courts have started sitting as Selection Committee or act as an Appellate Authority over the selection. It is not their domain, it should be clearly understood, as has been clearly held by this Court in a number of decisions....... 19. In the matter on hand, we find that neither the decision nor the decision making process was actuated with malice, and no grave mistake was committed by the Selection Committee leading to arbitrariness. We find that it is not a case of pick and choose, but the selection has been made rationally. The applicant-Respondent No. 1 was duly considered by the Selection Committee. However, on an overall assessment of her service records, her name was not included in the select list due to the statutory limit of its size and as officers with higher grading were available for inclusion in the select list as per the provisions of Regulation 5(5) of the Regulations. 20. So....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or before the date of meeting of the next Selection Committee, whichever is earlier and if the Commission declares the inclusion of the provisionally included officer in the Select List as unconditional and final, the appointment of the concerned officer shall be considered by the Central Government under Regulation 9 and such appointment shall not be invalid merely for the reason that it was made after the Select List ceased to be in force. 21. Since the name of Srimati V. Jayashree, Respondent No. 6 herein, was provisionally included in the select list and was made unconditional in the select list after her exoneration in the disciplinary proceedings, she was appointed in the 2008 batch. 22. Having regard to the entire material on record, we do not find any ground to agree with the reasons assigned by the CAT and the High Court while coming to their conclusion. The High Court has strangely made out a fresh additional point in favour of the first Respondent by observing that, on perusal of the records maintained by the Selection Committee, the High Court was not able to find the grading of the officers recorded by the State Government. In other words, the High Court was of t....