The Central Government Today (Dec 10) received a major setback from the Supreme Court in the case of compulsory retirement of Chhattisgarh IPS Gurjinder Pal Singh. The Central Government had filed a petition against the cancellation of retirement. Which was rejected by the Supreme Court.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The matter of cancellation of compulsory retirement of Chhattisgarh IPS Gurjinder Pal Singh had reached the Supreme Court. In this case, the Central Government has received a big blow from the Supreme Court.
The Central Government had gone to the Supreme Court against the cancellation of compulsory retirement by the High Court. But the Supreme Court rejected the Centre’s petition.
The bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice SVN Bhatti has ordered to dismiss the petition. Actually, Gurjinder Pal Singh is facing charges of corruption, extortion and treason.
The decision to cancel his compulsory retirement was first given by the Central Administrative Tribunal. Which was later upheld by Delhi HC.
“In this case, the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) overturned the compulsory retirement decision against the petitioner, and the High Court, in its challenged judgment, upheld the Tribunal’s order. Both the CAT and the High Court reasoned that this was a case of victimization of the officer. Consequently, the reasoning in the impugned judgment indicates that this was not an instance of removing unfit personnel. After considering the unique circumstances of this case, and while acknowledging the Union government’s authority to enforce compulsory retirement in deserving situations, we are of the opinion that there should be no disruption to the orders passed in favor of the respondent. Therefore, the Special Leave Petition (SLP) is dismissed.”
-SC
The Supreme Court upheld the decisions of CAT and the High Court, which had found that Gurjinder Pal Singh’s compulsory retirement was not justified and appeared to be a form of victimization rather than a legitimate action to remove an ineffective officer.
The Court recognized the Union government’s power to enforce compulsory retirement but concluded that, given the circumstances, there was no reason to disturb the earlier rulings in favor of Singh. Therefore, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition filed by the Union government.
PREVIOUSLY IN DELHI HC
On 23rd August 2024,the Delhi High Court upheld a decision made by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) that directed the reinstatement of Gurjinder Pal Singh, a senior Indian Police Service (IPS) officer from Chhattisgarh who had been suspended in 2021. The Central Government had challenged the CAT’s verdict, but the court, in its judgment on Friday(23rd August), dismissed the challenge and upheld the CAT’s decision.
Gurjinder Pal Singh, a prominent IPS officer, had been under suspension since 2021. The suspension was linked to several First Information Reports (FIRs) filed against him during the same year. These FIRs included allegations of corruption, sedition, and extortion. Singh, however, had a history of high-profile investigations, including serving as the head of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) that was tasked with investigating allegations against former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Raman Singh in an alleged multi-crore public distribution system scam.
The Central Administrative Tribunal, in its earlier order, had directed that Singh be reinstated, finding that the FIRs against him were registered at the “behest of higher authorities of the (then Chhattisgarh) state government” as he did not comply with their directives. The CAT’s observations pointed towards potential political motivations behind the charges.
The Delhi High Court, in its ruling, stated that the CAT’s verdict regarding IPS officer Gurjinder Pal Singh “suffers from no infirmity.” The division bench, comprising Justices Suresh Kait and Girish Kathpalia, carefully examined the circumstances surrounding the suspension and the subsequent FIRs lodged against Singh. The court noted that the Chhattisgarh High Court had already stayed proceedings in all three FIRs, highlighting that the Central Government’s decision to proceed with Singh’s compulsory retirement was premature.
The court pointedly remarked that the Central Government’s action appeared to be “a shortcut method without even waiting for the conclusion of departmental proceedings,” implying that due process was not followed.
Gurjinder Pal Singh’s troubles began between June and July 2021 when he was booked under three separate FIRs. These included a corruption case alleging he possessed disproportionate assets, a sedition case, and an extortion case linked to an incident purportedly occurring six years prior. Notably, the FIRs coincided with Singh’s tenure as the head of the SIT probing allegations against the former Chhattisgarh CM, adding a layer of complexity to the case.
Furthermore, Singh’s career had been marked by controversy even before these FIRs. In 2012, he was embroiled in an investigation related to the abetment of suicide of the then Superintendent of Police in Bilaspur, who tragically ended his life. The deceased officer had reportedly left a suicide note citing “harassment” by an “interfering boss” and “an arrogant and haughty judge of the high court.” However, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) closed the case in September 2013, stating that no case was made out against Singh.
Despite this, the Union Government reopened the suicide abetment case in November 2020, forming a five-member inquiry committee against Singh. This reopening was met with skepticism by the High Court, which observed that doing so without any reasoning or any fresh ground, especially when the closure report mentioned that no case was made out against him, which was accepted by the court, is nothing but an apparent attempt to harass Singh.
The Delhi High Court’s decision to uphold the CAT’s ruling is a significant legal victory for Gurjinder Pal Singh. It underscores the importance of adhering to due process and highlights potential issues of political interference in administrative actions against senior officers.
BACKGROUND
Gurjinder Pal Singh, who joined the Indian Police Services (IPS) in 1994 as part of the Madhya Pradesh cadre, was later reallocated to Chhattisgarh. On December 6, 2021, the State Government of Chhattisgarh informed Singh that a review of the records of 33 IPS officers, conducted under Rule 16(3), found them unfit to continue in service.
As a result, a Review Committee recommended their retirement.
The Union of India requested certain documents from the Chhattisgarh Government, which were provided, but the proposal for a deemed resignation of another officer, Myinthungo Tungoe, along with Mukesh Gupta’s superannuation, prompted the Chhattisgarh government to propose Gurjinder Pal Singh’s compulsory retirement.
On March 9, 2023, the Chhattisgarh government formally declared Singh unfit to remain in service.
Singh challenged this retirement decision, arguing that the Union’s move to retire him stemmed from a series of accusations, including a charge related to the suicide of the then Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, which had occurred in 2012.
Although the CBI investigated the incident, no evidence of abetment was found against Singh. Singh’s career advanced, and he was promoted to the rank of Additional Director General of Police in 2019. However, following his transfer in 2020 and a subsequent negative performance assessment, Singh raised concerns over the fairness of the Union’s decision, claiming it was a shortcut to avoid proper disciplinary proceedings.
Singh contested his retirement order, arguing that the procedure was unjust, particularly as the Union had not concluded the departmental proceedings. The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) sided with Singh, setting aside the compulsory retirement order and directing his reinstatement. In response, the Union appealed to the High Court, stating that the retirement order was made in public interest under Rule 16(3).
The case also involved Singh’s performance appraisal for 2019-2020, where his grade was downgraded from 7.90 to 6.00. Singh contended that this downgrade, along with other factors like the initiation of three FIRs against him, was unjust. Despite these allegations, the proceedings in all three FIRs had been stayed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on IPS Gurjinder Pal Singh
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
