'Fought For Justice, Got Justice, Then Lost Justice': J&K&L High Court Restores Seniority Of 1979 Police Recruits After Nearly Four Decades

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has allowed a long-pending Letters Patent Appeal filed by a batch of 1979 direct recruit Sub Inspectors of the Jammu and Kashmir Police, sharply criticising the manner in which binding judicial verdicts were repeatedly diluted through subsequent litigation and administrative actions.

A Division Bench of Justices Rajnesh Oswal and Rahul Bharti set aside the Single Judge's judgment and restored the seniority and promotional benefits flowing from Government Orders issued in compliance with the Supreme Court's 2007 judgment.

At the very threshold, the Court captured the essence of the prolonged dispute in stark terms, noting how the appellants' decades-long struggle had been rendered meaningless despite their success before the High Court and the Supreme Court. It remarked,

“Thematic reading between the lines of this case is that the appellants fought for justice, got justice and then lost justice to find themselves back to square one to be in situation no better than of year 1986 when they, joined by similarly aggrieved others, had commenced an original litigation in this court… yearning for the justice done to their cause.”

The appeal arose from a common judgment rendered by a Single Judge while deciding two writ petitions filed by direct recruit Deputy Superintendents of Police appointed pursuant to the 1995 selection process finalised in 1999. These officers had questioned Government Order of 2008 and the consequential Government Order of 2010, which granted retrospective promotions and refixation of seniority to the appellants officers who had entered service as direct recruit Sub Inspectors in April 1979.

Recounting the factual background in minute detail, the Division Bench traced the genesis of the dispute to a PHQ order issued in 1985, whereby pre-1979 Assistant Sub Inspectors were granted retrospective promotion as Sub Inspectors with effect from April 25, 1978. This, the Court noted, had the effect of artificially elevating them above the 1979 direct recruits and enabling them to march ahead in promotions to higher ranks.

The appellants had challenged this action as early as 1986. Although they ultimately succeeded before the writ court in 2004, and again before the Supreme Court in 2007, the Court observed that the relief granted was repeatedly neutralised. The bench observed,

“What for the entire exercise right from 1986 starting from institution of the writ petition… resulting in Single Bench judgment dated 29/11/2004 which ultimately got upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its judgment dated 05/12/2007 was meant to be of hollow effect insofar as the appellants are concerned, leaves this Bench to wonder.”

The Division Bench placed significant emphasis on the Supreme Court's 2007 judgment which had not only restored the Single Judge's 2004 verdict but had also made scathing remarks on the conduct of the State in granting retrospective promotions. Expressing amusement over the actions of the government the court said,

“The said order dated 03/12/1985 even otherwise appears to be mala fide having been passed for unauthorised purpose. If the said order dated 03/12/1985 is read with the earlier one… the intention of the Government to favour the private respondents herein becomes explicit. It is not expected of a government to brazenly favour one set of employees so as to defeat the bona fide claim of the other set of employees.”

The High Court noted that Government Order 2008 was issued solely to implement the mandate of the Supreme Court, restoring the appellants' seniority from the rank of Sub Inspector upwards, granting them retrospective promotion as Inspectors, Deputy Superintendents of Police and, eventually, Superintendents of Police. Interference with this order, the Bench held, amounted to unsettling a controversy that had already attained finality.

Reflecting on the consequences of the impugned Single Judge judgment, the Court recorded that the appellants had once again been pushed below officers who had already been declared junior to them by binding judicial pronouncements.

“To put it into simple words what the appellants find themselves to be in situation that they have ended from where they had literally started in 1986 with entire adjudicatory exercise being nothing but of hollow effect and benefit with respect to them and they finding themselves chasing their junior SIs even upto rank of SP.”

The Bench further observed that the continuous reshuffling of seniority lists during the pendency of the appeal had compounded the injustice, despite an interim order protecting the appellants' status. It observed,

“This churning of events… dislocated the appellants from their status and position as came to be accorded to them in terms of Government Order No. Home-597(P) of 2008 which was issued in compliance to the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India's judgment.”

Holding that the learned Single Judge erred in setting aside the Government Orders of 2008 and 2010, the Division Bench allowed the Letters Patent Appeal, restored the appellants' seniority and promotions, and reaffirmed that judicial finality particularly when pronounced by the Supreme Court cannot be reduced to a revolving door of litigation and administrative re engineering.

Case Title: Pyare Lal Bhat & Ors Vs UT Of J&K

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment