Pending disciplinary proceedings justify withholding integrity certificates for IPS promotion under statutory regulations.

The applicant, a direct recruit Deputy Superintendent of Police (1982 batch), challenged the seniority assigned to him in the Indian Police Service (IPS) cadre

Following a previous directive in OA No. 371/1997, the State was ordered to maintain his seniority in the State Police Service (SPS) based on his appointment date, placing him below Shri R.P. Shrivastava and above Shri M.S. Tomar

The applicant was promoted to the IPS in 2005 (against the 2004 select list) with seniority fixed from 1997

He alleged that a faulty 1996 seniority list excluded him from the zone of consideration, allowing his juniors to be promoted earlier with a 1993 seniority year

The respondents contended that the applicant’s seniority was corrected post-1997, but his promotion to IPS was delayed because a departmental charge sheet was issued to him in 2002, leading to the withholding of his integrity certificate and provisional status in subsequent Departmental Promotion Committees (DPCs)

He was finally promoted in 2004 after being exonerated

1. Whether the applicant was entitled to a retrospective year of allotment in the IPS cadre (1993) on par with his juniors.

2. Whether the respondents’ action of withholding the applicant’s integrity certificate and treating his promotion as provisional due to a pending departmental inquiry was legally valid under the relevant regulations.

Regulation 5(5) of the Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955, which stipulates that the names of officers facing departmental or criminal proceedings where a charge sheet has been issued must be treated as provisional, and their integrity certificates may be withheld

Statutory weightage formula for seniority, which subtracts earned weightage (based on length of service) from the year of the select list to determine the year of allotment

Precedent in Smt. Nutan Arvind vs Union of India & Anr (1996), which established that a court cannot sit as an appellate authority over the merit assessments made by a high-level DPC

The Tribunal observed that although the applicant's state-level seniority was eventually corrected, his promotion to the IPS was legally deferred due to the issuance of a charge sheet on September 18, 2002

Under the first proviso to Regulation 5(5) and Explanation I of the 1955 Regulations, the pendency of a charge sheet necessitates treating an officer’s inclusion in a select list as provisional and justifies the withholding of the integrity certificate

The court found that no juniors were promoted in the years (1998–2000) when the applicant was eligible but unsuccessful due to lack of vacancies

The applicant’s eventual year of allotment (1997) was correctly calculated by the Central Government by taking the 2004 select list year and subtracting 7 years of weightage earned for his 21 years of qualifying service

The Tribunal noted that once the DPC assesses merits and follows statutory procedures, judicial intervention is limited

It held that there was no legal infirmity in the respondents’ actions, as the withholding of the integrity certificate and the provisional status of the applicant's promotion were in strict compliance with Rule 5(5) of the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955

The seniority fixed as 1997 was deemed appropriate based on the 2004 select list and the applicable weightage formula

No costs were awarded