Chandigarh: In a significant judicial development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has converted a plea questioning the legality of ex-cadre Indian Police Service (IPS) appointments in Haryana Police into a public interest litigation (PIL). The move came after the original petitioner, Aarti, passed away during the pendency of the case.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry passed the order on Monday. The court appointed Advocate Pardeep Solath, who had been representing the late petitioner, as amicus curiae to assist in the matter, and directed the Union Government to file its response.
Read also: Chandigarh Police SIT Under Fire: High Court Summons IPS Officer Over Probe Into Alleged Assault on Colonel by Punjab Police
Background of the Case
The petition, filed in 2023, stemmed from a March 1, 2023 news report published by The Indian Express. The article highlighted a Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) communication to the Haryana government, questioning whether it had obtained necessary approvals before creating 23 ex-cadre IPS posts—four more than the maximum of 19 sanctioned under the Indian Police Service (Fixation of Cadre Strength) Amendment Regulation, 2017.
Key Allegations in the Petition
The plea raised several concerns about Haryana’s police cadre structure:
The state allegedly created 22 ex-cadre posts for IPS officers, including 14 at the rank of Director General of Police (DGP) and 8 at the Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) level, without adhering to the 2017 notification or the IPS Cadre Rules, 1954.
Under Rule 8, cadre posts must be filled by cadre officers, and no ex-cadre post should be filled without prior Centre approval.
The petitioner alleged that financial approvals and mandatory procedures were not followed.
It was claimed that cadre posts were being left vacant, in violation of Rule 10, which bars such vacancies for more than six months without Central government permission.
State’s Response and Court’s Intervention
The Haryana government sought dismissal of the petition on grounds of maintainability, arguing that matters relating to All India Services officers fall under the jurisdiction of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), as per the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
Additionally, the state stated:
- Most of the officers named in the petition no longer held the questioned posts.
- Some had retired, making the petition infructuous.
Appointments were made under Rule 4(2) of the IPS Cadre Rules, allowing temporary postings for operational exigencies without prior Centre approval.
A cadre review was already in progress.
However, the bench observed that the petition raised substantial questions of public interest, and hence warranted adjudication under PIL jurisdiction.
The next hearing is scheduled for August 28, 2025.
