Supreme Court Dismisses IPS Officer's Appeal for Cadre Re-allocation to Rajasthan -- Delay and Administrative Finality Bar Claim Despite Insider Vacancy -- Tamil Nadu Cadre Allocation Upheld

  • 24
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Rupesh Kumar Meena, an IPS officer selected in the 2004 batch and allocated to Tamil Nadu cadre, sought re-allocation to Rajasthan cadre against an insider vacancy, claiming entitlement as the third in merit after two senior candidates declined the offer -- He filed applications before the Central Administrative Tribunal and High Court, which were dismissed, leading to the present appeals before the Supreme Court -- The Court examined the issues of delay, administrative finality, and the consumption of vacancies -- It found that the appellant raised the claim six years after allocation, which was an unreasonable delay, and that re-allocation would disrupt cadre finality and create a chain reaction affecting other officers -- The Court dismissed the appeals, emphasizing the need for certainty in administrative allocations

Headnote

The Supreme Court dismissed the civil appeals filed by Rupesh Kumar Meena, an IPS officer of Tamil Nadu cadre, challenging the orders of the High Court and Central Administrative Tribunal that rejected his claim for re-allocation to Rajasthan cadre against an insider vacancy from the 2004 batch -- The appellant argued that he was entitled to the vacancy as two senior candidates, Rishikesh Meena and Rajesh Kumar, did not join the Rajasthan cadre, and that the vacancy remained unfilled -- The Union of India contended that the allocation was final, the vacancy was consumed when offered to Rishikesh Meena, and the appellant's claim was barred by delay and laches -- The Court held that cadre allocations must achieve finality to avoid administrative chaos, and the appellant's delay of six years in raising the claim was unreasonable -- The appeal was dismissed, upholding the appellant's allocation to Tamil Nadu cadre

Issue of Consideration: The Issue of consideration was whether the appellant, an IPS officer allocated to Tamil Nadu cadre, could claim re-allocation to Rajasthan cadre against an insider vacancy from the 2004 batch after a delay of six years, and whether such re-allocation would disrupt administrative finality and create a chain reaction in cadre allocations

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the civil appeals, upholding the orders of the High Court and Central Administrative Tribunal, and confirmed the appellant's allocation to Tamil Nadu cadre, rejecting his claim for re-allocation to Rajasthan cadre

2026 LawText (SC) (02) 12

Civil Appeal Nos.11302-11303 of 2016

2026-02-04

RAJESH BINDAL J. , ATUL S. CHANDURKAR J.

2026 INSC 119

Rupesh Kumar Meena

Union of India & Others

Nature of Litigation: Civil appeal challenging orders of the High Court and Central Administrative Tribunal regarding cadre re-allocation for an IPS officer

Remedy Sought

The appellant is asking the court to set aside the orders of the High Court and Tribunal and direct his re-allocation from Tamil Nadu cadre to Rajasthan cadre against an insider vacancy from the 2004 batch

Filing Reason

The appellant claimed entitlement to the Rajasthan cadre insider vacancy as the third in merit after two senior candidates, Rishikesh Meena and Rajesh Kumar, did not join, and argued that the vacancy remained unfilled

Previous Decisions

The Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed the appellant's application (O.A. No.2326 of 2010) on 08.03.2011 -- The High Court upheld this dismissal on 26.08.2011 and dismissed a review petition on 21.10.2011

Issues

Whether the appellant's claim for re-allocation to Rajasthan cadre is barred by delay and laches Whether cadre allocations can be reopened after a significant period without disrupting administrative finality

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that he had a legitimate right to the Rajasthan cadre insider vacancy as two senior candidates declined, and the vacancy was still available, with no delay as the situation became clear only in 2010 The Union of India argued that the allocation was final, the vacancy was consumed when offered to Rishikesh Meena, and allowing the claim would create a chain reaction affecting other allocations, with the appellant's delay of six years being unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Cadre allocations in civil services must achieve finality to ensure administrative stability and avoid chaos -- Claims for re-allocation raised after unreasonable delay, such as six years in this case, are barred by laches -- Re-opening allocations can create a chain reaction affecting other officers and disrupt the entire allocation process

Judgment Excerpts

The argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that, the stand of the respondents that when the vacancy was offered to Rishikesh Meena, the same stood filled, was wrong He further submitted that if there is any error in the allocation of cadre, the correction is always done but not in the type of cases the appellant is claiming relief The Court held that cadre allocations must achieve finality to avoid administrative chaos, and the appellant's delay of six years in raising the claim was unreasonable

Procedural History

The appellant was selected in the 2004 Civil Services Examination and allocated to Tamil Nadu cadre -- He filed O.A. No.2326 of 2010 before the Central Administrative Tribunal seeking re-allocation to Rajasthan cadre, which was dismissed on 08.03.2011 -- The High Court upheld this dismissal on 26.08.2011 and dismissed a review petition on 21.10.2011 -- The appellant filed civil appeals before the Supreme Court, which were heard on 22.01.2026 and decided on 27.01.2026

Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses IPS Officer's Appeal for Cadre Re-allocation to Raj...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Considers Consolidation of Sureties for Multiple Bail Orders Acros...