R.C. SAHI AND ORS. ETC. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [1998] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 612 · Decided: 10-11-1998 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. SAGHIR AHMAD, K. VENKATASWAMI · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
R.C. SAHi AND ORS. ETC. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 10, 1998 
B 
[S. SAGHIR AHMAD AND K. VENKATASWAMI, JJ.] 
c 
Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 : 
Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955 : Rules 8 and 105(JV-A) 
Emergency Commissioned Officers and Short-Service Commissioned 
Officers (Reservation and Vacancies) Rules, 1967 : 
Service law-Army-Fixing of seniority between the petitioners-Direct 
recruits and respondents-Emergency Commissioned Officers-Reckoning of 
D past services-Appointment of Emergency Commissioned Officers to Central 
Reserve Police Force-Held in the absence of a provision to give benefit of 
the past service in Army service to the Emergency Commissioned Officers the 
Executive Instruction dated 5. 7. 1972 applicable-Held seniority of private 
respondents was rightly fixed in C.R.P.F. by taking into account service 
rendered by them as Emergency Commissioned Officers. 
E 
Administrative Law-Applicability of executive instructions in the 
absence of a provision. 
Constitution of India, 1950 : Articles 32 and 142. 
F 
Supreme Court-Directions for doing complete justice-Revision of 
seniority list sought by petitioners--Oround taken that seniority of private 
respondents was wrongly fixed by reckoning their service as Emergency 
Commissioned Officers-Dismissal of writ petition-But directions given for 
doing complete justice-Petitioner who is still in service in the promoted 
G post shall continue in the said post, if necessary, by creating a supernumerary 
post. 
H 
Ravi Paul and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., [1995) 3 SCC 300, 
relied on. 
Union of India & Ors. v. N.S. Sekhawat & Ors., (1989) Supp. 1 SCC 
612 
R.C. SAHi v. U.0.1. 
613 
270, explained. 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : I.A. No. 4 In Writ Petition (C) 
No. 1177 of 1989 with Writ Petition (C) No. 211 of 1997. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.) 
Rajeev Dhawan, Raj Kumar Gupta, H. V.P. Sharma and A.N. Bardiyar for 
the Petitioners. 
A 
B 
K.N. Rawal, Additional Solicitor General, N.N. Goswamy, Y.P. Mahajan C 
and P. Parameswaran for the Union of India. 
M.L. Verma, Ashok K. Mahajan and K.K. Gupta for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Writ Petition (C) No.211/97 under Article 32 of the Constitution of India 
has been filed with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus to the respondents 
I and 2 to implement the judgment of this Court dated January 19, 1995 in 
Ravi Paul and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., [1995] 3 SCC 300 and also 
D 
the Order dated July 18, 1995 of this Court in R.C. Sahi & Ors. etc. v. Union E 
of India & Ors., and for other consequential reliefs as well. 
It is the case of the petitioners that this Court in R.C. Sahi's case had 
expressly directed the first respondent to revise the seniority list, if necessary, 
after hearing the officers concerned, in accordance with law. The first p 
respondent, according to the petitioners, purporting to implement the order 
of this Court in Sahi' s case, had prepared a seniority list ignoring the relevant 
provisions of law which had affected their seniority. It is to be noted, the 
petitioners were also parties in Sahi's case. 
Though the issue lies in a narrow compass, wide ranging arguments G 
were addressed by the learned counsel in this case. 
The short question that arises for consideration is whether Respondents 
I and 2 are justified in taking into account the past services of the private 
~ 
respondents in the Army for the purpose of fixing seniority between,. the H 
614 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1998] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A petitioners direct recruits and the respondents-Emergency Commissioned 
Officers (for short 'ECOs'). 
At this stage, a brief recount of the facts relating to the issue is 
necessary. The Central Reserve Police Force (for short 'CRPF'), with which 
we are nt:N concerned, came into existence under the Central Reserve Police 
B Force Act, 1949. The CRPF Rules were framed in the year 1955 to deal with 
various matters. Rule 105 related to appointment and promotion of superior 
officers. By Notification No. F/2/4/67.P-II dated May 11, 1967 issued by 
Ministry of Home Affairs, an amendment to Rule 105 was introduced by 
adding Clause (IV-A) to Rule 105. By the said amendment, appointment of 
C Emergency Commissioned Officers (ECOs) and Short-Service Commissioned 
Officers of the Armed Forces of the Union was introduced as one of the 
modes of recruitment. Since then, dispute between the direct-rec
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.