Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
CASE NO.:
Writ Petition (civil) 135 of 2000
PETITIONER:
R.L. MEENA AND ORS.
RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/09/2000
BENCH:
M. JAGANNADHA RAO & DORAISWAMY RAJU
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
2000 Supp(3) SCR 100
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
The petitioners are officers of the Indian Police Service (IPS) in the
Arunachal, Goa, Mizoram, Union Territories Cadre. They have all been
promoted to the IPS from the Delhi and Andaman Nicobar Police Services
which is one of the feeder services to the IPS. The petitioners filed these
petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking the
following reliefs. "Issuance of writ, order or direction quashing the
notifications dated 31.12.97 being arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of
Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and for further directions
that petitioners and all other similarly situated All India Service
Officers may be granted all the benefits with effect from 29th April, 1985
the date of granting relief to Shri K.K. Goswami and other officials of the
Madhya Pradesh Forest Services.
By the date this writ petition came up for hearing to this Court, this
Court had disposed of Writ Petition No. 613 of 1994 and batch filed by the
Tamil Nadu Administrative Services Officers Association against the Union
of India and others.
At the time of admission of this writ petition on 28.7.2000 learned senior
counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are seeking a
direction similar tc the one issued in the Tamil Nadu Officer’s case
referred to above which has since been reported in 2000 (3) SCALE 98.
After hearing learned Additional Solicitor General for the respondents, and
the learned counsel for the petitioners, we are of the view that a similar
direction is to be issued in this case also. We direct as follows:
"It is open to the petitioners to file a detailed representation to the
Central Government, giving all the particulars of the post which they
consider are fit to be encadred and special reasons why they should be
encadred with a retrospective date and on such representation being made,
the Central Government will consider these representations in consultation
with the State Government concerned, and take appropriate decisions in this
regard preferably within six months from the receipt of those
representations. The petitions and appeal are disposed of accordingly. No
costs."
The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above directions.