- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Raghunath Prasad Singh v. Secretary, Home (Police) Department, Government Of Bihar And Others
Factual and Procedural Background
Until 6 May 1970, Bihar maintained a single police force comprising the general cadre and the Signal (Wireless) branch. On that date, the wireless wing was declared a separate cadre. The State’s order permitted personnel who were already serving in the combined force to choose—within three months—whether to remain in the new wireless cadre or revert to the general police cadre. Further government instructions dated 1 January 1974 called for a “fresh option” from existing wireless staff in order to implement an earlier High Court judgment.
The appellant, recruited as a wireless constable in 1972-73 (after the cadres had been separated), claimed entitlement to exercise this option and sought absorption into the general police force. When the administration declined, he filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court. A Division Bench held that the option was limited to personnel who had joined before 6 May 1970 and dismissed the petition. The present appeal, filed by special leave, challenges that dismissal.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the State’s option scheme, as interpreted by the High Court and set forth in government instructions dated 1 January 1974, extended to personnel recruited into the wireless organisation after 6 May 1970.
- Whether any ancillary relief should be granted concerning promotional opportunities within the wireless cadre.
Arguments of the Parties
Appellant's Arguments
- Contended that the 1974 instructions entitled all existing wireless staff—including recruits of 1972-73—to opt into the general police cadre.
- Asserted that the administration never invited his option, thereby denying him a right conferred by government orders and the earlier High Court judgment.
- Highlighted absence of promotional avenues in the wireless organisation as a rationale for seeking transfer.
Respondent-State's Arguments
- Maintained that the option was confined to personnel who were part of the combined force before the 1970 bifurcation.
- Emphasised that the appellant joined only after the wireless cadre became a closed, distinct service and thus fell outside the benefitted class.
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent | Rule or Principle Cited For | Application by the Court |
|---|---|---|
| Ramdev Singh v. State of Bihar, CWJC No. 21 / 1968 (Patna HC, 9-5-1969) | The High Court held that, until separate cadres were formed and options exercised, personnel were to be treated as members of a single police force for promotion and service benefits. | The Supreme Court read the 1974 instructions as confined to those who came within the ambit of this decision—that is, personnel serving prior to 6-5-1970—thereby excluding the appellant. |
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Court scrutinised the 1974 government instructions in light of the 1969 Patna High Court judgment in Ramdev Singh. It concluded that:
- The option contemplated in the 1974 communication was meant solely to give effect to the earlier judgment, which protected officers who had served in the combined force before bifurcation.
- The appellant was recruited in 1972-73, well after the wireless cadre had been declared a closed, separate service; he therefore fell outside the protected category.
- On the merits, the High Court’s interpretation was correct, and the appellant had no statutory or equitable right to opt into the general cadre.
Addressing an ancillary concern raised during oral argument, the Court observed that lack of promotion prospects within the wireless wing could impair service efficiency. To remedy this, it invoked its plenary powers to direct the State of Bihar either to create at least two promotional levels within six months or, failing that, to reopen the option to revert to the general cadre for all wireless personnel.
Holding and Implications
The appeal is dismissed. However, the Court issued mandatory directions:
- The State of Bihar must, within six months, amend rules to provide at least two promotional opportunities for wireless-cadre officers.
- If the State fails to do so, it must, within a further two months, allow all wireless-cadre personnel a fresh option to transfer to the general police cadre.
Implications are limited to administrative restructuring within Bihar Police; the ruling does not establish a broader legal precedent on cadre options but imposes a binding directive on the State to improve career progression or reopen cadre mobility.
Order
1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the decision of a Division Bench of the Patna High Court rejecting the writ petition of the appellant who had claimed for being absorbed in the regular police force on the basis of exercise of option.
2. It is not disputed that until 6-5-1970, there was a combined police force in the State of Bihar raised under the Police Act of 1861 which included regular police personnel and those serving in the Signal (Wireless) branch. On 6-5-1970, the wireless wing was separated. Admittedly, the appellant was recruited as a constable in the wireless wing after May 1970. A Division Bench of the Patna High Court in CWJC 21 of 1968, disposed of on 9-5-1969, while dealing with the case of literate constable recruited into the Bihar Police Signals directed:
“We, therefore, direct the respondents to treat the petitioner as a member of the single police force until two separate cadres are created for the wireless and the general sections by asking the personnel to opt for one or the other and to consider his case in the matter of promotion along with the other literate constables of the general police force.”
On 9-5-1970, the State Government issued the following direction to the Inspector General of Police:
“Sub: Declaration of the General Wireless Organisation of the police department as a closed cadre and separate from the general police cadre
Orders — Sanctioned with effect from the date of issue of the order.
2. All the existing permanent and temporary posts of the police wireless organisation will be deemed to be a part and parcel of the above cadre.
3. The existing staff of the police wireless organisation will have the option either to remain within the abovementioned cadre or to opt for the general police cadre. The option will have to be exercised within three months from the date of issue of the order....”
On 1-1-1974, further instructions were issued to the Inspector General of Police to the following effect:
“Sub: CWJC No. 21/68—Sh. Ramdev Singh v. State of Bihar and Others.—for the implementation of the orders of the Patna High Court
Sir,
With reference to the GO letter No. 3247 dated 27-7-1974 of Shri T.P Sinha, Assistant Inspector General of Police (Communication) on the subject abovementioned, I have been directed to say that the State Government has taken the decision that fresh option be taken from the existing staff of Police Wireless Organisation in connection with their adjustment in the general police cadre. The option can be taken within two months of the issue of the orders....”
The appellant claimed that he was entitled to exercise option and since option was not asked from him, he may be reverted to the general cadre. When that was not done, he applied to the High Court for direction. The High Court found that the benefit of option was confined to recruits prior to 6-5-1970 and since the appellant had been recruited long after that date, he was not entitled to the exercise of benefit of option. The writ application was accordingly dismissed and that decision is the subject matter of the appeal.
3. We have read the judgment of the High Court with reference to the documents placed and heard learned counsel for parties. There is no doubt that the High Court was right in finding against the appellant that the option in terms of the instructions dated 1-10-1974 was available to those who came within the ambit of the earlier judgment. Thus the appellant being a recruit of 1972-73, not in the combined cadre but in the wireless organisation, was not entitled to the benefit of option. His appeal is, therefore, liable to be dismissed.
4. Before we part with the appeal, we would like to take notice of another aspect. In course of hearing of the appeal, to a query made by us, learned counsel for the appellant indicated the reason as to why the appellant was anxious to switch over to the general cadre. He relied upon two or three communications which are a part of the record where it has been indicated that there is no promotional opportunity available in the wireless organisation. Reasonable promotional opportunities should be available in every wing of public service. That generates efficiency in service and fosters the appropriate attitude to grow for achieving excellence in service. In the absence of promotional prospects, the service is bound to degenerate and stagnation kills the desire to serve properly. We would, therefore, direct the State of Bihar to provide at least two promotional opportunities to the officers of the State Police in the wireless organisation within six months from today by appropriate amendments of Rules. In case the State of Bihar fails to comply with this direction, it should, within two months thereafter, give a fresh opportunity to personnel in the police wireless organisation to exercise option to revert to the general cadre and that benefit should be extended to everyone in the wireless organisation.
5. The appeal is dismissed with the directions indicated above. There would be no order for costs.
Alert