M. R. Shah, J. - (1.) Leave granted in Special Leave Petitions (C) No.12393/2013, 35548-35554/2015 and 13937/2016. All these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 4.12.2012 passed by the High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 6314 of 2012, the Union of India and others have preferred the Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No. 12393/2013. 2.1 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi dated 3.9.2015 in Writ Petition (C) No. 153 of 2013 and other allied writ petitions, the Union of India and others have preferred the present Civil Appeals @ SLP(C) Nos.35548-35554/2015. 2.2 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi dated 15.12.2015 in Writ Petition(C) No.3529/2015, the Union of India and others have preferred the present Civil Appeal @ SLP(C) No.13937/2016. Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 12393 of 2013
(3.) The facts leading to the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 12393 of 2013 arising out of the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi dated 4.12.2012 in Writ Petition (C) No. 6314 of 2012, are as under. 3.1 The original Writ Petitioners - who are the RPF Officers holding Group "A" posts approached the High Court by filing the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following reliefs/prayers: (a) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to complete the formalities for constituting the RPF as an Organized Service within a definite time frame with further direction to extend the benefits by giving effect to the RPF Recruitment Rules already approved by the Respondent No. 1 as communicated vide letter dated 01.03.2005 to Respondent No. 2 and to treat Group "A" Railway Officers recruited through Civil Service Examination in all respect. (b) Issue further direction to the Respondents to apply with retrospective effect all policy circulars to the petitioners as applicable in respect of other Group A Railway Services bringing them at par with their batch mates recruited through civil service examinations and grant promotion to the Petitioners and other similarly situated officers on that basis with all co-sequential benefits including the back wages. (c) Issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records, and other/direction (including those not communication to the Petitioner, if any, by way of which the Respondents have taken a decision to initiate the process to fill any vacancy in the RPF through deputation against the statutory provisions and thereafter quash the same. 3.2 It was the case on behalf of the original Writ Petitioners that all the writ petitioners are the Officers holding Group "A" posts in the Railway Protection Force (hereinafter referred as to the 'RPF') and all of them were recruited through the Civil Services Examination conducted by the UPSC along with 15 other Group "A" Central Services, including three Group "A" Railways Services, i.e. Indian Railway Traffic Service, Indian Railway Accounts Service and Indian Railway Personnel Service. According to the Writ Petitioners, as per the Gazette Notification published by the Government of India, based on which the UPSC conducts an examination, these Railway services have been kept at par with each other. According to the original Writ Petitioners, the notification and the offer of appointment as well as the Railway Protection Force Act, 1957 (for short 'the RPF Act, 1957') clearly stipulate the Officers of RPF as Railway Servants with stipulation that in addition to the Indian Railway Establishment Code applicable to the Railway servants, the Officers of RPF will be governed by the provisions contained in the RPF Act and RPF Rules, 1959 as well as the new RPF Rules, 1987, Recruitment Rules 1981 and 1994. 3.3 It was the case on behalf of the original Writ Petitioners that in spite of the consistent stand taken by the Ministry of Railways that the officers of the RPF have all the attributes of Organized Service and they should be constituted as Organized Service, the original Respondent No. 1 - Union of India through Ministry of Railways and Department of Personnel and Training (Cadre Review Division) [for short 'DoPT'], for one reason or the other, have taken a final decision in this respect resulting in large scale stagnation of the officers of RPF, like the Writ Petitioners, at every rank. 3.4 It was the case on behalf of the original Writ Petitioners that, starting from 1981 to 1996, various amendments were brought out in the RPF Act as well as the Rules by which initially the proportion of deputation was reduced and finally by amendment in the Recruitment Rule, RPF Rules and by bringing in amendment in the Principle Act, 1957, by Section 19 of the Amendment Act, 1985, deputation was debarred by giving only two options to the existing officers on deputation either repatriation in their parent cadre or to accept retirement. 3.5 According to the original Writ Petitioners, "in principle" decision taken by the Railway Board in the year 1986 to constitute RPF as an Organized Service and referred the matter to the DoPT (Cadre Review Division) for its approval. According to the original Writ Petitioners, thereafter, through O.M. dated 12.7.2001, the Ministry of Railways forwarded the proposal for deeming the RPF as an Organized Service to be known as the Indian Railway Protection Force Service. According to the original Writ Petitioners, thereafter, the DoPT (Cadre Review Division) considering all aspects, by Communication dated 20.11.2003, communicated in principle approval to constitute RPF as Organized Group "A" Central Service (for short 'OGACs'). According to the original Writ Petitioners, thereafter, the Ministry of Railways, vide Communication dated 1.3.2005, forwarded the draft Recruitment Rules for Indian Railway Protection Force Service on the lines of other Organized Group "A" Central Services of Railways after due approval of the Ministry of Railways being the competent authority. According to the original Writ Petitioners, thereafter, during 2005-2010, various steps were taken for bringing necessary changes to improve the service condition of the RPF officers and to bring them at par with other Railway Services, but the same did not result in any meaningful solution, as a result of the same, the RPF officers like the Writ Petitioners kept on stagnating in the same post and suffered. 3.6 According to the original Writ Petitioners, several meetings were held by the Railway Board to resolve the issue, but no effective steps were taken and the original Respondents continued to fill the vacancies available with them by calling the officers on deputation, even when the eligible officers were available and in spite of the statutory prohibition in force. Therefore, the original Writ Petitioners approached the High Court and prayed for the aforesaid reliefs. 3.7 That by the impugned judgment and order, the High Court, after having noted and considered the O.M. dated 20.11.2003, by which in principle decision was taken to constitute the RPF as OGACs, has directed that within six months the necessary cadre structure of RPF as also the Service Rules be finalized with reference to the RPF being an OGACs. The High Court has also further observed and directed the Cabinet Secretary to nominate a Nodal Officer to coordinate within the three bodies, namely, UPSC, DoPT and Ministry of Railways. 3.8 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the direction contained in the impugned judgment and order dated 4.12.2012, the Union of India and others have preferred the present Appeal.;