Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the recruitment and subsequent promotion of a retired Army officer as Assistant Commandant in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF). The respondent was initially appointed for three years and later promoted to Commandant on a temporary basis. After being informed that he was not entitled to permanent absorption due to Rule 107(2) of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, he filed a writ petition which was allowed by the High Court. The appellants challenged this decision, leading to the Supreme Court's review. The court noted that the amended Rule 107(2) applied to the respondent, entitling him to absorption from the date of the amendment, but clarified that prior to this amendment, he was not entitled to permanent absorption as per the original rules. The court emphasized that the scheme of the rules did not allow for permanent absorption for officers recruited under the specified conditions. The appeal was allowed in part, confirming the respondent's absorption effective from the date of the amendment while denying the earlier absorption claim. The court also acknowledged the respondent's long service and allowed credit for pension purposes (Paras 385-386).
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Absorption Rights - Eligibility for Permanent Absorption - Central Reserve Police Act, 1949, Rule 107(2) - The court held that the respondent was entitled to absorption in the cadre from the date the amended rule came into force, but not to permanent absorption prior to that date due to the scheme of the rules. The High Court's direction for absorption from the date of appointment was set aside (Paras 385-386).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent was entitled to permanent absorption in the Central Reserve Police Force under the amended Rule 107(2).
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in part, confirming the respondent's entitlement to absorption effective from 20th September 1985, while setting aside the High Court's direction for absorption from the date of appointment. The court directed that the respondent would be entitled to credit of continuous service for pension purposes.
Law Points
- Absorption rights
- temporary service
- recruitment rules
- amendment effect
- pension entitlement
