GURDEV SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1971] 3 S.C.R. 550 · Decided: 27-01-1971 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.K. MITTER · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

550 
GURDEVS~GH 
'V .• 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
JaTijU{lly 27, 1971 
[G. K. MITTBR AND A. N. RAY, JJ.] 
Service-Indian Police Service Sche;,e-Appellant interviewed and 
ced in List 11 un4er the Scheme while officiating as Superintenden~ of. 
ice-If inclusion in List conje"ed any rights on hl"m-Whether could 
.be reverted to substantive post of 'Deputy Superintendent of Police. 
The appellant originally belonged to the Police Service in the Stat~ 
'·of Patiala and was promoted to officiate as a Superintendent of Police in 
.February 1950 in the erstwhile State of PEPSU. After the Indian Police 
Servic~ Scheme was extended to PEPSU in 1950, the appellant was one 
of several persons interviewed by the Federal . Public Service Commis-
A 
B 
c 
sion and his name was placed on what was styled in Li~t II in the Sche~e. 
He continued working as an officiating Superintendent of Police without 
being confirmed in the post. On December 1, 1954, he was reverted to 
D 
his substantive rank of Deputy Superintendent by an order of the Inspec-
ior-General of Police. The appellant thereafter filed a suit claimii1g that 
the order of reversion was bad. 
He alleged that the inclusion of his 
name in List II of the Scheme gave him a right to continue as an offici.at-
:ing Superintendent of Police for five years and his reversion within that 
period to his substantive post amounted to a punishmen1. 
He alleged 
there was thus non-c.Jmpliance with Art-:- 311 · of the C.on·stitution. 
He 
also complained that while he was reverted, persons who were junior to · E 
him; in the sense that their names had ·not been included in any of the 
Lists · under the Scheme, were allowed to continue as officiAting Supei'in-
iendents of1 Police; there was therefore 
d~crimination ~s against him. 
!be case of\__the respondent State was that the reversion tlad been effected 
purely on aCiministrative grounds as a Superintendent of 
1Police who was 
returning to the State had to be accommodated, ·and the£e was no vacancy 
in which the ap.Pellant could be allowed to work as Superintendent of 
F 
Police. 'The Trral Court held that the impugnee order was not made 
by way of punishment and the plaintiff had failed .to prove there was 
any discrimination against him. An appeal to the High Court was dis-
·missed. On appeal to this Court.· 
· 
HELD : The reversion was justified on administ!'ative grounds and · 
there was no bar to such reversion by reason of , the inclusion of the 
·appellant's name in List II. The said list merely ensured that the officers 
G 
whose name were- borne thereon would be watched for the space of five 
years and tliey might be absdrbed in .the All India Service even within 
. ·the said period as a result of periodical reviews.. Although reversion on 
the ground of unfitness was mentioned in the scheme the possibility of 
such reversion when there was no available post in the cadre of Superin-
tendents of Police was not ruled out. As the officers· in List 11...-had no 
·right to be absorbed in the Indian Police Service immediately, the direc-
tion in the scheme that "officers placed in List II. wilt continue to hold 
·their present post'.' merely. mt:ant that t~ey would ~ot be made. to go out 
H 
of their' posts except on Justifiable groun3s. 
Holdmg a post ID an offi-
ciating capacity as a· 'Superintendent G>f Police.' did not entitled the appellant 
~ 
\·.< 
~,·~ 
.. 
• 
GURDEV SINGH V. PUNJAB (Mitter, J.) 
551 
A 
to continue in that post even if officers senior to him who were on leave 
or had been sent out of the State on deputation were to come back to 
the State and there was no room in the cadre to absorb them all. [556 Cl 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1018 of 
1967. 
B 
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated January 16, 1967 
of the Pu~jap and Haryana High Court in Regular First Appeal 
No. 358 of f9-64. 
M~ C. Setalvad, Bishan Narain, Jawahar Lal Gupta and P. C. 
Bhartari, for the appellant. 
C 
Harbans Singh and R. N. Sachthey, fOr the respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Mitter, J.-The appellant who originally belonged to the 
police service in the State of Patiala and was promoted to offi-
D 
ciate as a Superintendent of Police on 11th February 1950 in the 
erstwhile State of PEPSU filed a suit against the State of Punjab 
in January 1961 for a declaration to the effect that the order of 
the PEPSU Government dated 1st December 1954 reverting him 
to the post of Deputy Superintendent · of Po

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.