Owner Can Avoid Confiscation Under NDPS by Proving Lack of Knowledge or Connivance in Illicit Use of Vehicle: Supreme Court Court is Expert of Experts: High Court Upholds Right to Rebuttal Evidence in Will Dispute Exceptional Circumstances Warrant Use of Inherent Powers to Reduce Sentences in Non-Compoundable Offenses: Supreme Court Execution of Eviction Decree Limited to Suit Premises; Additional Claims Not Permissible: Bombay High Court Only Apprentices Under the 1961 Act Are Excluded from Gratuity – Calcutta High Court Demand for Penalty and Interest Without Following Natural Justice Violates Section 11A of the Central Excise Act: P&H High Court Rajasthan High Court Acquits Bank Manager, Citing "Processing Fee, Not Bribe" in Corruption Case Compensatory Nature of Section 138 NI Act Permits Compounding Even at Revisional Stage: Madras High Court Kerala High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 99 Crore: Faults Adjudicating Authority for Contradictory Findings Section 138 NI Act | Compounding Permitted Even at Revisional Stage with Reduced Fee in Special Circumstances: HP High Court No Renewal, Only Re-Tendering’ – Upholds Railway Board’s MPS License Policy: Delhi High Court Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes Second FIR Against Former Minister in Corruption Case Nature of Suit Must Be Determined on Evidence, Not Technical Grounds: Delhi High Court on Rejection of Plaint Economic Offences Must Be Scrutinized to Protect Public Interest:  Allahabad High Court Dismisses Plea to Quash FIR Against Cloud Investment Scheme Company Golden Hour Care Is a Matter of Right, Not Privilege: Supreme Court on Road Accident Victim Treatment Limitation Law | When Once the Time Has Begun to Run, Nothing Stops It: Supreme Court Section 14 of Limitation Act Shields Bona Fide Claimants: SC Validates Arbitration Amid Procedural Delay Time Lost Cannot Be Restored, But Justice Can: Supreme Court Orders Immediate Release of Convict Declared Juvenile Bailable Warrants in Domestic Violence Cases Only in Exceptional Circumstances - Domestic Violence Act Cases Are Primarily Remedial, Not Punitive: Supreme Court

Stability of an Officer's Seniority Is Crucial to Their Career Progression and Expectations: Delhi High Court Sets Aside RPF Seniority List Alterations

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling involving the seniority dispute within the Railway Protection Force (RPF), the Delhi High Court today set aside the provisional combined seniority list and related orders that disturbed the existing seniority of several petitioners. The judgment underscores that the stability of an officer's seniority is crucial to their career progression and expectations, declaring that the application of Rule 99.2 and Rule 99.2A of the RPF Rules had no substantial bearing on the determination of seniority in this case.

The case centered around the seniority adjustments following interzonal transfers of petitioners within the RPF. The dispute arose when the provisional combined seniority list, issued on February 13, 2023, significantly altered the petitioners' seniority rankings, which they contended were done without justification and in deviation from established rules and precedents.

Seniority and Rule Application: The court noted that despite the authorities' reliance on Rule 99.2 for revising seniority, the rule itself did not justify the alterations made. The judges emphasized the importance of maintaining the stability of seniority and promotions already granted, stating, "the stability of an officer's seniority is crucial to their career progression and expectations."

Legitimate Expectation: The court recognized the legitimate expectation of the petitioners based on past promotions and consistent seniority, critiquing the retrospective adjustments as potentially prejudicial.

Impugned Orders: Both the actions challenged by the petitioners were quashed by the court. It was held that redrawing seniority based on the challenged provisional list and the earlier orders without valid reasons was inappropriate and disrupted the established order unjustifiably.

Decision: The Delhi High Court directed the setting aside of the contested seniority list and related orders, allowing for the issuance of a new list if necessary, in accordance with the law. The judgment clarified the non-applicability of the cited rules to the specific circumstances of the case, safeguarding the seniority of the petitioners as previously determined.

Date of Decision: April 16, 2024

Agni Deo Prasad and Ors. vs Union of India and Ors.

Similar News