Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

Delhi High Court Directs Central Government to 'Consider the Grievance of the Petitioners' Over SSB Promotions and Deputations

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court has directed the Central Government to "consider the grievance of the petitioners" in cases related to promotions and deputations within the Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB). The ruling comes in response to writ petitions filed by SSB officers holding the rank of Second-in-Command and Deputy Commandant.

The petitioners had challenged a Signal dated 14th August 2023, which called for nominations of officers from other Central Armed Police Forces to fill up Commandant posts in SSB. The officers argue that such a decision "would hamper their promotional avenues."

The Court also mentioned that in terms of the Recruitment Rules dated 17th June 2013, priority should be given to filling up the post by promotion before considering the option of deputation. The petitioners' counsel argued that those considered for deputation "have not undergone promotional courses as prescribed by the Director-General of the SSB."

One of the key issues raised by the petitioners was the Central Government's power of relaxation as per Rule 9 of the Recruitment Rules. The learned counsel for the petitioners stated that although the petitioners were not eligible as of the date, they were only "short of a few months from completing the requisite five years of regular service." He highlighted that such power has been exercised in the past "in the interest of the force."

Another pivotal point was about the morale and career progression of the SSB officers. The Court observed that if officers from other forces were brought in on deputation, "the morale of the officers serving in the SSB for last several years is likely to be affected."

The High Court disposed of the petitions, directing that they should be placed before the competent authority i.e., the Central Government. The authority has also been directed to "consider the request of the petitioners for exercise of the power conferred of relaxation and/or appointment or grant of local rank to the officers."

The Court clarified that the competent authority should take "an independent view of the matter without being influenced by anything stated in this order on merit."

 Date of Decision: 20 October  2023

SANJAY KUMAR AND ORS vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/20-Oct-2023-SanjayKumar-Vs-UOI.pdf"]

Similar News