Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 1288 (MAD)

P. Moorthy v. The Registrar & Others

2005-08-08

A.R.RAMALINGAM, P.SATHASIVAM

body2005
Judgment :- (Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records and quash the order on the file of first respondent in O.A.No. 178 of 2003 dated 28-10-2003 and direct the third respondent to revise the seniority list placing the petitioner above respondents 4 to 19 in the Tamil Nadu Police Service.) COMMON ORDER P. Sathasivam, J. Aggrieved by the common order of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chennai dated 28-10-2003, made in O.A.Nos. 6483 to 6487/2002, 176 to 190 and 300/2003, the unsuccessful applicants therein filed the above Writ Petitions. 2. The petitioners/applicants appointed to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Category I in Tamil Nadu Police Service, approached the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal by filing individual Original Application challenging the validity of the establishment list notified by the Director General of Police, Chennai in his proceedings dated 15-11-1999 as per which women Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti Dowry Cell have been included and integrated with persons who are regularly appointed to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Category I in the Tamil Nadu Police Service. Since the Tribunal rejected their claim and upheld the orders of the Government, they filed the above writ petitions. Since the issue raised and points involved are one and the same in all these writ petitions, they are being disposed of by the following common order. For convenience we shall refer the parties as arrayed before the Tribunal. 3. The case of the applicants are briefly stated hereunder: The Government of Tamil Nadu passed G.O.Ms.No. 1352 Home (Police-II) Department, dated 9-11-94 which provided sanction for creation of 26 temporary posts of Women Deputy Superintendent of Police (22 for districts and one each for Madras, Madurai and Coimbatore cities) in the scale of pay of Rs.2200-75-2800-100-4000 for 26 Anti-Dowry Cells for a period of one year from the date of filling up of the posts. It further provided that all the Women Police Stations shall be placed under their direct supervision. 4. The Government passed G.O.Ms.No. 491, Home (Police-II) Department, dated 28-3-1995 wherein after referring to the earlier G.O., dated 9-11-1994 proceeded to state that though 26 posts of Woman Deputy Superintendents of Police sanctioned are temporary posts, they are likely to continue and they will be made permanent in due course. 4. The Government passed G.O.Ms.No. 491, Home (Police-II) Department, dated 28-3-1995 wherein after referring to the earlier G.O., dated 9-11-1994 proceeded to state that though 26 posts of Woman Deputy Superintendents of Police sanctioned are temporary posts, they are likely to continue and they will be made permanent in due course. Therefore, the Government have decided that the Women Deputy Superintendent of Police posts be filled up by way of direct recruitment through the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. As per the General Rules, 30 per cent of vacancies in all posts should be reserved for women which is also applicable to the post in Tamil Nadu Police Service. However, on administrative reasons, Government have decided that the above said 26 post of Women Deputy Superintendent of Police be filled up by way of direct recruitment through Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission by granting one time exemption from the relevant rules. Accordingly, one time exemption was granted from the relevant rules because newly created posts were for placing officers to be incharge and control of all the Women Police Stations dealing with Anti-Dowry Cases. 5. Based on the said Government Order and on the basis of the request of the Government of Tamil Nadu, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission caused notification No. 19/95 dated 10-7-95 calling for applications for 26 vacancies to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti-Dowry Cell. 25 candidates were selected by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission and the Government passed G.O.Ms.No. 679, Home (Police-II) Department dated 9-5-1997 appointing those 25 selected persons as Women Deputy Superintendent of Police for Anti-Dowry Cells in Tamil Nadu Police Service. 6. Out of 25 people selected and appointed, 20 persons joined the Police Training College in Chennai for undergoing training on 26-5-97. In the course of the training, four persons left for various reasons and only 16 persons completed their training and they were given postings and appointed as Deputy Superintendents of Police Grade I, Anti-Dowry Cells in various district headquarters and in cities viz., Chennai, Madurai and Coimbatore. All the 16 persons have finished their training and they have been appointed and given postings in 1997. All the 16 persons have finished their training and they have been appointed and given postings in 1997. All these appointments have been made to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police Category I and Director General of Police, Chennai published the Establishment List dated 15-11-99 wherein they have been given appropriate seniority and the list include their names also along with the Deputy Superintendent of Police and Additional Superintendent of Police who are holding the post as on date. Taking objection to inclusion of Women Deputy Superintendent of Police in their seniority list, Original Applications have been filed before the Tribunal. 7. It is the claim of the applicants that they have been appointed as Deputy Superintendents of Police in 1997-98 and they were all appointed by transfer of service/promotion or directly recruited through Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. Most of the applicants have joined the police service by about 1972 as Sub-Inspectors of Police and they have been promoted and appointed as Deputy Superintendent of Police in the year 1997-98. Some of the applicants have been selected for Group I service i.e., Deputy Superintendent of Police through direct recruitment and have been appointed in the year 1988. All these applicants who have been appointed in the year 1997-98 have been placed before the 16 Women Deputy Superintendent of Police and this is objected to by the applicants. 8. Appointment to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police is made on the basis of notified vacancies as per Tamil Nadu Service Rules. Vacancies notified every year are permanent vacancies. They are filled through the process of direct recruitment/promotion/transfer in the ratio fixed under the relevant police services rules. Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission has published notification dated 3-7-95 calling for applications for selection to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police in Category I in the Tamil Nadu Police Service and after holding competitive examination and interview 17 vacancies to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police have been filled up by direct recruitment and postings were given to them in the year 1988. Recruitment conducted to the newly created posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police for Anti Dowry Cell, a deviation from the regular method of selection was made. Recruitment conducted to the newly created posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police for Anti Dowry Cell, a deviation from the regular method of selection was made. The calling for application itself was restricted only to women candidates (as against an open competitive examination conducted in the very same year for selection to the permanent police of Deputy Superintendent of Police). They were directly permitted to sit for main examination and no preliminary examination was held and to this extent, there was difference in the manner of selection itself. The promotion or appointment to the newly created temporary posts is not to be dealt with the executive orders seeking to modify the general rules. Unless and until there is an amendment to the rules or formulation of special rules, the services of candidates to the newly created temporary posts cannot be weighed on equal terms with that of the candidates appointed as against the regular notified permanent vacancy. In the absence of any specific rules as regards to the temporary posts created, the consideration of these posts along with permanent substantive posts for purposes of drawing up seniority and further promotion thereon cannot be guided by the general rules relating to the fixation of seniority and the consequent promotion thereon. The selection of 26 candidates for temporary posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police for Anti-Dowry Cell are not made permanent in the manner known to law. However, in the list of seniority for the year 1999 complied by the Director General of Police, Chennai, relating to the year 1999, the selected candidates to the temporary posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police in the Anti-Dowry Cell are also included along with the candidates in the permanent posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police in the Tamil Nadu Police Service. The applicants who were selected for the year 1998 were ranked in particular seniority list published in Ocotober, 2001. Representations have been made by the applicants/petitioners immediately thereafter raising objections to ranking given to Women Deputy Superintendent of Police selected to the newly created Deputy Superintendent of Police Anti-Dowry Cell along with the candidates for the permanent post stating that it is arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. Representations have been made by the applicants/petitioners immediately thereafter raising objections to ranking given to Women Deputy Superintendent of Police selected to the newly created Deputy Superintendent of Police Anti-Dowry Cell along with the candidates for the permanent post stating that it is arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. Ranking of the women candidates to the newly created temporary posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police along with the permanent post holders seriously prejudice the rights of the applicant/petitioners and it has been done in an arbitrary and unjust manner. 9. In the absence of any specific provision in the general rules or specific rules, 26 temporary posts of woman Deputy Superintendent of Police can never be merged with the substantive posts whose services are regulated by the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules. Government has passed orders in G.O.Ms.No. 598 dated 10-7-2002 as per which the Government have directed the re-deployment of the Women Deputy Superintendent of Police selected for Anti-Dowry Cell exclusively by a back-door method of recruitment to Crime Record Bureau in districts. Any treatment extended to temporary post holders on equal terms with the candidates holding permanent posts will be totally in violation of the principles of equality enunciated in Article 14 of the Constitution of India and therefore liable to be set aside. The grievance of the applicant is by merging the temporary post with permanent post, the applicant and others who have joined service to the post as well as those who are promoted to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police in 1997 after more than 26 years of service from the rank of a Sub Inspector are placed far below the ranks of the women Deputy Superintendent of Police appointed to the temporary post for Anti-Dowry Cell exclusively. Therefore, the applicants prayed to revise the seniority list of Deputy Superintendent of Police in Tamil Nadu Police Service by placing the applicants above the newly selected Deputy Superintendent of Police for the purpose of considering promotion to the post of A.D.S.P. in Tamil Nadu Police Service. 10. Therefore, the applicants prayed to revise the seniority list of Deputy Superintendent of Police in Tamil Nadu Police Service by placing the applicants above the newly selected Deputy Superintendent of Police for the purpose of considering promotion to the post of A.D.S.P. in Tamil Nadu Police Service. 10. The case of the Government and the Director General of Police as stated in their counter are briefly stated hereunder: The Government in G.O.Ms.No. 1352 Home (Pol-II) Department dated 9-11-1994, sanctioned creation of 26 temporary posts of woman Deputy Superintendents of Police for 26 Anti Dowry Cells and directed that all the Women Police Stations should be under their direct supervision. In G.O.Ms.No. 491 Home (Police II) Department dated 28-3-1995, the Government ordered that the above said 26 posts of woman Deputy Superintendents of Police, be filled up by way of direct recruitment through the TNPSC by granting one time exemption from the relevant rules. Based on the said Government Orders, The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission issued a notification dated 3-7-1995 calling for applications from women candidates for direct recruitment to 26 posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category-I) for 26 Anti Dowry Cells in the Tamil Nadu Police Service. All normal criteria for direct recruitment to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category I) were stipulated in the notification. Out of the 25 candidates selected for appointment, only 20 candidates joined institutional training at Police Training College, Chennai on 26-5-1997. Of these, 4 candidates had left the department on various grounds. Later the Government took a decision to create Woman Police Stations in all Sub Divisional headquarters in a phased manner, commencing from 2001-2002 and consequently the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Law and Order or Assistant Commissioner of Police of the Sub Division has been placed in charge of supervision of the All Women Police Stations and the posts of woman Deputy Superintendents of Police sanctioned for Anti Dowry Cells have been redeployed as Deputy Superintendent of Police District Crime Record Bureau, vide G.O.Ms.No. 598 Home (Police II) Department dated 10-7-2002. Based on the suggestion of the Director General of Police and in consultation with the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission and taking note of the changed circumstances in respect of the posts of woman Deputy Superintendents of Police recruited for Anti Dowry Cells, the Woman Deputy Superintendents of Police have been given postings to various wings of the Police Department. Though woman Deputy Superintendents of Police were appointed against temporary posts, their appointment was on regular basis. All normal criteria for direct recruitment to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category I) in the Tamil Nadu Police Service were followed. They underwent institutional training for one year in the Police Training College in terms of rule 7 of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Service. They also underwent 6 months practical training under a Superintendent of Police, military training at Madras Regimental Centre, Wellington, foundational course for class 1 officers. They were also allowed to complete their period of probation satisfactorily as per rule 5 of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Serivice and were also confirmed in the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category I) in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 176 P and AR Department dated 5-7-1994. Considering the method of selection, appointment and exigencies of service, the woman Deputy Superintendents of Police are to be treated on par with other Deputy Superintendent of Police and there is no basis to treat them as a separate entity. Their seniority is governed as per Special Rules for the Tamil Nadu Police Service and General Rules for the Tamil Nadu Subordinate Services. 11. In the light of the above pleadings, we have heard Mrs. Chitra Venkataraman, Mr. T.R. Rajagopalan, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. A.L. Somayaji, learned Additional Advocate General for State, Mr. Vijay Narayan, learned senior counsel for woman Deputy Superintendents of Police and Mr. Sathyanarayanan, Mr. Sridharan and V. Ravi for some of the respondents. 12. 11. In the light of the above pleadings, we have heard Mrs. Chitra Venkataraman, Mr. T.R. Rajagopalan, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. A.L. Somayaji, learned Additional Advocate General for State, Mr. Vijay Narayan, learned senior counsel for woman Deputy Superintendents of Police and Mr. Sathyanarayanan, Mr. Sridharan and V. Ravi for some of the respondents. 12. The points for consideration are, (a) Whether the action of the Government in selecting and appointing woman Deputy Superintendents of Police (Anti Dowry Cell) temporarily in 1997 and treating them on par with Deputy Superintendents of Police who have been directly recruited by Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission in the permanent post and the regularly promoted service candidates is sustainable?; (b) Whether they have to be treated as separate entity not in any way affecting the seniority and promotion chances of regularly appointed Deputy Superintendents of Police; and (c) Whether the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal is right in rejecting the objection raised by the applicants with regard to the combined seniority list. 13. At the foremost, it is useful to refer the relief prayed for by the applicants/petitioners herein before the Tribunal. Column 3 of the Original Application, the order which is challenged before the Tribunal reads as under: “Seniority list prepared by Tamil Nadu Police Service, Annual list of Deputy Superintendent of police (Category I).” In all those applications, the prayer of the applicants is “to revise the seniority list of Deputy Superintendents of Police in the Tamil Nadu Police Service by placing the applicant above the respondents 3 to 18 for the purpose of considering promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendents of Police in the Tamil Nadu Police Service by placing the applicant above the respondents 3 to 18 for the purpose of considering promotion to the post of ADSP in Tamil Nadu Police Service.” As rightly pointed out by Mr. A.L. Somayaji, learned Additional Advocate General, it is clear that the applicants have not questioned either the initial recruitment that was made in the year 1997, or earmarking of all the 26 posts of Deputy Superintendents of Police (Category I) for woman for which exemption was granted by the Government. It is also relevant to note that even the establishment list/seniority list was prepared and published in 1999, but the same was questioned only in 2002-2003 by way of the above Original Applications before the Tribunal. Mr. It is also relevant to note that even the establishment list/seniority list was prepared and published in 1999, but the same was questioned only in 2002-2003 by way of the above Original Applications before the Tribunal. Mr. T.R. Rajagopalan, learned senior counsel appearing for some of the applicants/petitioners and Mrs. Chitra Venkatraman, learned counsel for some of the applicants/petitioners would contend that inasmuch as the woman Deputy Superintendents of Police were selected in a temporary post, they can never contest for common seniority with direct recruits who are posted against substantial vacancies. It is also their complaint that by promoting the Anti Dowry Cell appointees the Government tries to achieve by back door method what cannot be achieved directly. They also contended that the one time exemption from 30 per cent reservation for woman candidates and followed by further reservation for women candidates in the direct recruit pertaining to 1998 would go to show that Article 14 of the Constitution is offended totally. They also contended that the Tribunal failed to note that merging of the women Deputy Superintendents of Police who were not selected in accordance with special rules relating to the constitution of the service in the cadre of Deputy Superintendents of Police into the main stream is violative of principles of natural justice. On the other hand, it is the claim of the learned Additional Advocate General as well as Mr. Vijay Narayan, learned senior counsel for some of the directly recruited woman Deputy Superintendents of Police that by virtue of the rules, the Government have created 26 temporary posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police exclusively for women which is permissible. The selection process was entrusted to Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission and by following all the procedures and after conducting several tests as per the rules and applicable to others, these Deputy Superintendents of Police have been selected. According to them, rule 48 of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules enables the Governer to give exemption from any of the provisions, including reservation to the extent of 100 per cent if the same is just and equitable. According to them, rule 48 of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules enables the Governer to give exemption from any of the provisions, including reservation to the extent of 100 per cent if the same is just and equitable. According to them, inasmuch as Government indicated even at the time of creation of temporary posts that the same are to be made permanent, all procedures have to be followed, they have to undergo various tests, the selected woman Deputy Superintendents of Police are to be treated on par with the other direct recruit/promoted Deputy Superintendents of Police and the seniority will be fixed based upon their initial appointment which cannot be claimed either improper or illegal. 14. The Government in G.O.Ms.No. 1352 Home (Police-II) Department dated 9-11-1994, passed an order creating 26 temporary posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police (exclusively for women) (23 for Districts and one each for Madras, Madurai and Coimbatore Cities) for 26 Anti-Dowry Cell. In G.O.Ms.No. 491 Home (Police-II) Department dated 28-3-1995, the Government made it clear that though 26 posts of Woman Deputy Superintendents of Police sanctioned are on temporary basis, they are likely to continue and they will be made permanent in due course. It is not in dispute that the cadre consists temporary and permanent posts. In A.K. Subraman Vs. Union of India, reported in (1975) 1 Supreme Court Cases 319, the Supreme Court referred to the interpretation for the quota rule of 1944 and 1951, held in the case of Bishan Sarup Gupta v. Union of India (1973) 3 SCC 1 , as follows: (para 24) “24. It is feebly contended on behalf of the direct recruits that the quota rule should relate to only vacancies in permanent posts and not temporary posts. This contention is not accepted either by the promotees or the department. These is nothing in the Rules of 1945 or the quota rule of 1951 which says that the vacancies must be vacancies in permanent posts. Indeed the vacancies must be permanent vacancies that is to say vacancies which are not for a few days or for a few months or are otherwise adventitious. The whole cadre has consisted of permanent and temporary posts for years. Indeed the vacancies must be permanent vacancies that is to say vacancies which are not for a few days or for a few months or are otherwise adventitious. The whole cadre has consisted of permanent and temporary posts for years. Permanent vacancies are, therefore, likely to take place both in the permanent posts and in the temporary posts….” In view of the same, as rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General, the cadre consists temporary as well as permanent post. (Emphasis supplied). It is true that sanction of 26 new posts of Deputy Superintendents of Police were temporary, but in G.O.Ms.No. 491 Home (Police-II) Department dated 28-03-1995, issued subsequently, it was made clear that even though the posts have been sanctioned on temporary basis, they are likely to continue and they will be made permanent in due course. Admittedly, the calling for personnel for 26 posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police were not on ad hoc arrangement or as a stop gap arrangement for a particular period. In the present cases, though temporary posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category I) for manning Anti Dowry Cell were created and sanctioned, appointment was made on a permanent basis and selection of candidates was entrusted to Tamil Nadu Public Service Connection. The post of Deputy Superintendent of Police comes within Clause II Category (I) of the Tamil Nadu Police Service. The method of appointment is by direct recruitment or recruitment by transfer from Inspectors of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service. Pursuant to the Government Orders, the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission issued notification dated 03-07-1995 calling for applications from women candidates for direct recruitment of 26 posts of Deputy Superintendents of Police (Category I) for 26 Anti Dowry Cells in Tamil Nadu Police Force. The perusal of the said notification shows that all normal criteria for direct recruitment to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category I) were stipulated namely age limit, written examination consisting 2 parts i.e., a qualifying examination and a main written examination, educational qualification, physical qualification etc. It was explained before the Tribunal as well as before this Court, that only due process of selection, the Government in G.O.Ms.No. 679 Home Department dated 9-5-1997 notified the selection of 25 women candidates for appointment as women Deputy Superintendents of Police for Anti Dowry Cell in Tamil Nadu Police Service. It was explained before the Tribunal as well as before this Court, that only due process of selection, the Government in G.O.Ms.No. 679 Home Department dated 9-5-1997 notified the selection of 25 women candidates for appointment as women Deputy Superintendents of Police for Anti Dowry Cell in Tamil Nadu Police Service. It is brought to our notice that the said candidates were appointed to act on probation as woman Deputy Superintendents of Police for Anti Dowry Cells in the Tamil Nadu Police Service from the date of their joining duty and their appointment was provisional subject to the disposal of O.A.No. 4670/96 pending before the Tribunal at the relevant time. It is not in dispute that the said Original Application was dismissed subsequently. It is also pointed out that out of 25 candidates selected for appointment, only 20 candidates joined for training, of these 4 candidates had left the department on their joining duty and only 16 persons completed their institutional and practical training etc., and joined as women Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti Dowry Cells. Apart from following all normal criteria for appointment to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police, communal rotation was also followed. The selected persons underwent institutional training for one year in the Police Training College in terms of rule 7 of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Service following the syllabus prescribed for direct recruit Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category I). They also underwent 6 months practical training under a Superintendent of Police, military training at Madras Regimental Centre, Wellington, foundational course for Class I Officers as prescribed for directly recruited Deputy Superintendents of Police (category I). They were also allowed to complete the period of probation as per rule 5 of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Service and also confirmed in the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category I) in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 176 P and AR Department dated 5-7-1994. All these owould clearly show that though selection was made for the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police on temporary basis, the posts were likely to continue and they will be made permanent in due course, the work of selection of candidates was entrusted to Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. All procedures were strictly adhered to and the selected persons underwent all the training/tests applicable for Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category I). All procedures were strictly adhered to and the selected persons underwent all the training/tests applicable for Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category I). In such circumstances, the contra arguments made on behalf of the petitioners are liable to be rejected. 15. Coming to the contention that 100 per cent reservation for women is not permissible, the Government in G.O.Ms.No. 491 Home (Police-II) Department, dated 28-03-1995, ordered that the sanctioned 26 post of women Deputy Superintendents of Police be filled up by way of direct recruitment through Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission by granting one time exemption from the relevant rules. Though as per Rule 21 of the Tamil Nadu State Subordinate Service Rules, a minimum of 30 per cent of all vacancies which are to be filled during direct recruitment shall be set apart for women candidates irrespective of the fact whether the rule of reservation of appointment applies to the post or not, rule 48 enables the Government to exempt any of the provisions in the said rules or in the special rules. Rule 48 reads as under: "Rule 48. Notwithstanding anything contained, in these rules or in the special rules, the Governor shall have power to deal with the case of any person or class of persons serving in a civil capacity under the Governor of Tamil Nadu or of any person who has or of any class of persons who have served as aforesaid or any candidate or class of candidates for appointment to a service in such manner as may appear to him to be just and equitable. Provided that, where any such rule is applicable to the case of any person or class of persons, the case shall not be dealt with in any manner less favourable to him or them than that provided by that rule." In this regard, Mr. Vijay Narayan, learned senior counsel for some of the respondents, by relying on a decision of the Apex Court reported in P.V.T. Philip v. P. Narasimha Reddy, reported in AIR 1993 Supreme Court 2403, would submit that by virtue of Rule 48 of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules, the action of the State Government cannot be faulted with and that they are fully justified in earmarking all the 26 posts for women candidates as a one time measure. While considering similar provision namely rule 47 of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules which gives power to the Governor/Government to relax any of the rules, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that if the Government thought it fit to give the benefit of the said Rule to a particular person or persons, the Government’s decision could hardly be faulted. They further observed that “But more important in this connection are the provisions of Rule 47 of the Rules which give wide powers to the Governor to deal with the case of any person in such manner as may appear to him to be just and equitable". It is also relevant to refer another decision in P.N. Premchandrana v. State of Kerala, reported in (2004) 1 S.C.C. 245 wherein Their Lordships dealt with regularisation of the respondents therein with retrospective effect from the date of temporary promotion. It was observed by the Supreme Court that Rule 39 of the Kerala State Subordinate Services Rules which gives power to Governor to deal with the case of any person or persons serving in civil capacity under the Government of Kerala or any candidate for appointment to a service in such a manner as may appear to the Government to be just and equitable. It was further observed by the Supreme Court that “Rule 39 of the Rules is a residuary provision conferring overriding power and thus in terms thereof grant of promotion/appointment with retrospective effect is permissible. The said provision is impari materia to Rule 48 of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules. 16. It was held by the hon'ble Supreme Court in Haridas Parsedia v. Urmila Shakya reported in (2000) 1 Supreme Court Cases 81, that the power of relaxation if available in the Rules can be exercised either by a general administrative order or a special administrative order. 17. In ASHOK KUMAR UPPAL AND OTHERS v. STATE OF J AND K, reported in (1998) 4 Supreme Court Cases 179, it was held that even if the power to relax the rules or any recruitment thereof is not contained in the Rules the authorities/Government gets such power since it becomes "a residuary matter falling under Rule 12 of J and K Secretariat (Subordinate) Service Recruitment Rules, 1972 and upheld the exercise of power relaxing certain rules. 18. 18. In SANTOSH KUMAR v. STATE OF A.P., reported in (2003) 5 Supreme Court Cases 511, while considering similar rules, namely, rule 47 of A.P. State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1962, Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service Rules as well as Rule 31 of the A.P. State and Subordinate Services Rules which speaks about relaxation of Rules by the Governor, the Court has held that "based on the language and contents of Rule 47 of the General Rules and in the light of the decisions of this Court, the Tribunal as well as the High Court have firmly concluded that State Government has power to grant relaxation of Rules with retrospective effect. 19. On a careful analysis of the above principles laid down in various decisions as well as Rule 48 of General Rules which gives ample power to the State Government to relax or exempt any of the Rules, we are of the view that the State Government is fully justified in granting one time exemption from the relevant rules in G.O.Ms.No. 491 Home (Police-II) Department dated 28-03-1995 for creation of 26 temporary posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police exclusively for women. In view of the same, the decisions referred to by Mr. T.R. Rajagopalan, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, namely, (1996) 9 S.C.C. 178 (DR. RAM RAJ RAM v. STATE OF BIHAR); 1997 5 S.C.C. 81,(V.K. DUBEY v. UNION OF INDIA); and A.I.R 1958 S.C 1137 (NOHIRIA RAM v. UNION OF INDIA) are not helpful to the cases on hand. 20. As regards recruitment from two sources-quota, the Hon'ble Supreme Court prescribed certain principles as Principles A to I in DIRECT RECRUIT CLASS II ENGG. OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION V. STATE OOF MAHARASHTRA, reported in AIR 1990 Supreme Court 1607. On consideration of the entire case laws on that subject, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held: "44 To sum up, we hold that: (A) Once an incumbent is appointed to a post according to rule, his seniority has to be counted from the date of his appointment and not according to the date of his confirmation. The corollary of the above rule is that where the initial appointment is only ad hoc and not according to rules and made as a stop-gap arrangement, the officiation in such post cannot be taken into account for considering the seniority. The corollary of the above rule is that where the initial appointment is only ad hoc and not according to rules and made as a stop-gap arrangement, the officiation in such post cannot be taken into account for considering the seniority. (B) If the initial appointment is not made by following the procedure laid down by the rules but the appointee continues in the post uninterruptedly till the regularisation of his service in accordance with the rules, the period of officiating service will be counted..." From the above principles, it is made clear that if the appointment is in accordance with the rules, then seniority has to be counted from the date of his appointment. The above said decision has been considered by the Supreme Court in the later judgement in the case of KESHAV DEO v. STATE OF U.P., (1999) 1 Supreme Court Cases 280. The following conclusion are relevant: (para 16) "16. In O.P. Singla v. Union of India (1984) 4 SCC 450 the contest was between promotees and direct recruits. A Bench of three Judges held that the seniority of direct recruits and promotees appointed under the Rules must be determined according to the dates on which the direct recruits were appointed to their respective posts and the dates from which the promotees have been officiating continuously either in temporary posts created in the Service or in substantive vacancies to which they were appointed in a temporary capacity." Following the principles A and B in AIR 1990 S.C. 1607 (supra), it was held: (para 19) "19. In Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association v. State of Maharashtra (1990) 2 SCC 715 ) the Constitution Bench held that once an incumbent is appointed to a post according to rule, his seniority has to be counted from the date of his appointment and not according to the date of his confirmation." In the instant cases we have already held that though the sanction of post was only for temporary, the Government itself by subsequent order, have made it clear that the 26 posts of Deputy Superintendents of Police were likely to be made permanent, that the entire selection of candidates was entrusted with the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, that all the provisions of the relevant Rules have been strictly complied with while selecting the said 26 posts. In such circumstances, as held by the Supreme Court, that once an incumbent is appointed to a post according to the rule, his seniority has to be counted from the date of his appointment, we hold that the selection, appointment and fixation of seniority in respect of 26 Deputy Superintendents of Police for Anti Dowry Cell are within the powers of the Government. 21. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the contesting respondents, when initial appointments were made in accordance with the Rules, it is primarily for the Government or the Executive authority concerned to decide the effect of equation. In this connection, it is worth-while to refer a judgment of the Supreme Court in R.S. MAKASHI v. L.M. MENON, reported in AIR 1982 Supreme Court 101: (para 34) "34. When personnel drawn from different sources are being absorbed and integrated in a new department, it is primarily for the Government or the executive authority concerned to decide as a matter of policy how the equation of posts should be effected. The Courts will not interfere with such a decision unless it is shown to be arbitrary, unreasonable or unfair, and if no manifest unfairness or unreasonableness is made out, the Court will not sit in appeal and examine the propriety or wisdom of the principle of equation of posts adopted by the Government....." 22. In SHIBA KUMAR DUTTA v. UNION OF INDIA, reported in (1997) 3 Supreme Court Cases 545, it was held that unless the action is arbitrary or there is invidious discrimination between persons similarly situated, doing same type of work, it would be difficult for the courts to go into the question of equation of posts or fitment into a particular scale of pay. They must be left to be decided by the Expert Committees and Government. The courts cannot go into them and evaluate the job criteria and scales of pay prescribed for each cateogory. 23. While dealing with matter regarding equation of posts for merger of cadres, the Supreme Court in S.P. SHIVPRASAD PIPAL v. UNION OF INDIA [(1998) 4 Supreme Court Cases 598] has held: (para 5) "5. However, when different cadres are merged certain principles have to be borne in mind. 23. While dealing with matter regarding equation of posts for merger of cadres, the Supreme Court in S.P. SHIVPRASAD PIPAL v. UNION OF INDIA [(1998) 4 Supreme Court Cases 598] has held: (para 5) "5. However, when different cadres are merged certain principles have to be borne in mind. These principles were enunciated in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Chandrakant Anant Kulkarni [ (1981) 4 SCC 130 : (1982) 1 SCR 665 ] (SCR at p.678) while considering the question of integration of government servants allotted to the services of the new States when the different States of India were reorganised. This Court cited with approval the principles which had been formulated for effecting integration of services of different States. These principles are: In the matter of equation of posts, (1) where there were regularly constituted similar cadres in the different integrating units the cadres will ordinarily be integrated on that basis but (2) where there were no such similar cadres, the following factors will be taken into consideration in determining the equation of posts: (a) Nature and duties of a post; (b) Powers exercised by the officers holding a post, the extent of territorial or other charge held or responsibilities discharged; (c) The minimum qualifications, if any, prescribed for recruitment to the post and; (d) The salary of the post. This Court further observed that it is not open to the court to consider whether the equation of posts made by the Central Government is right or wrong. This was a matter exclusively within the province of the Central Government. Perhaps the only question the court can require into is whether the four principles cited above had been properly taken into account. This is the narrow and limited field within which the supervisory jurisdiction of the court can operate." 24. In SHANDEEP KUMAR SHARMA v. STATE OF PUNJAB, reported in (1997) 10 Supreme Court Cases 298, it was held that, (para 12) "12.....Policy wise it is not possible to think that the appellant would have been the only kith and kin of those who suffered on account of the activities of the terrorists in Punjab or those who faced terrorism bravely. Perhaps, in this particular selection the appellant happened to be the only beneficiary of the policy. Perhaps, in this particular selection the appellant happened to be the only beneficiary of the policy. Nor can we find any mala fides merely because the Government evolved the policy on the occasion when the appellant approached for relaxation of the standard. The occasion would have provided to the Government an opportunity to recapitulate the events and thus to remind themselves of the plight of those families which suffered traumatic experiences when their kith and kin were relentlessly involved in continued operations fighting the terrorists who were possessed with highly lethal weapons and using hideouts to strike blitz against innocent people as well as the police force intermittently. A Government may have to act on some occasion for chalking out a particular policy. If any particular occasion has alerted that Government to the necessity for taking a policy decision it is hardly sufficient to attribute mala fide or favouritism to the Government." 25. To sum up, as observed above, the Government by virtue of their power, in G.O.Ms.No. 1352 Home (Police-II) Department dated 9-11-1994, created 26 temporary posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police exclusively for women for Anti Dowry Cell. In the subsequent order namely G.O.Ms.No. 491 Home (Police-II) Department dated 28-3-1995, the Government expressed in clear terms that those temporary posts are likely to continue and they will be made permanent in due course. General Rule provides reservation of 30 per cent of vacancies in all posts to women and the same is applicable to Tamil Nadu Police Service also. However, the Government on administrative reasons, have decided to fill up the said 26 posts of women Deputy Superintendents of Police by way of direct recruitment through the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission by granting one time exemption from the relevant rules by virtue of their power under Rule 48 of Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules. As discussed earlier, the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission by following the relevant rules and adhering to Rule of communal reservation, selected 25 persons. The selected candidates underwent institutional training for one year in the Police Training College under Rule 7 of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Service; 6 months practical training under a Superintendent of Police; Military Training at Madras Regimental Centre, Wellington; Foundational Course for Class I Officers. They were posted as Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti Dowry Cell. The selected candidates underwent institutional training for one year in the Police Training College under Rule 7 of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Service; 6 months practical training under a Superintendent of Police; Military Training at Madras Regimental Centre, Wellington; Foundational Course for Class I Officers. They were posted as Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti Dowry Cell. Subsequently, based on the advice of the Director General of Police, and taking note of the future of the selected candidates, they were distributed to various Divisions. We are satisfied that while preparing seniority list in the Deputy Superintendent of Police - Category I neither the directly recruited Deputy Superintendent of Police nor the service promotees were affected since the seniority of all the persons including the present Deputy Superintendent of Police selected for Anti Dowry Cell were put in the appropriate place according to their seniority. Neither the policy decision of the Government nor deployment of the selected candidates to other Divisions are improper or illegal. As rightly observed by the Tribunal, there is nothing wrong in ranking them along with the applicants who have been either directly recruited as Deputy Superintendent of Police either by direct recruitment or by promotion. As held in the decisions discussed above, they are to be ranked and seniority has to be reckoned with reference to the date of their joining the post. All these aspects have been duly discussed by the Tribunal and it rightly rejected the claim of the applicants. We are in entire agreement with the said conclusion. 26. In the light of what is stated above, we do not find any merit in these petitions; accordingly, all the Writ Petitions are dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.