High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/1660/2020allowed

State Of Punjab v. Central Administrative Tribunal Chd And ORS

2020-11-06Mr Justice Jaswant Singh,Mr. Justice Sant Parkash112 pages

!"#$%%

&''

( '&& #

) *+ ,"!"# -.!/

"!01%%"!"%%/-!023!%4!3$3!"3!%4!3

( '& 5#

) *+ ,3%6!-7"!

"!01%%"!"%%/-!023!%4!3$3!"3!%4!3

8 ( '&'9#

) *+ ,3%6!-7"!

"!01%%"!"%%/-!023!%4!3$3!"3!%4!3

: ( '&;'#

) *+ ,"!"# -.!/

"!01%%"!"%%/-!023!%4!3$3!"3!%4!3

; ( 85''#

) *+ ,%3!"33!""7!3<!<!

% -/0%$,%$11%%

& ( :&'&#

) *+

% -/0%$,%$11%%

,3*3*-"!#!

9 ( :&'5#

) *+

% -/0%$,%$11%%

,3,%3!"33!""7!3<!<!

* =>* ,,(, =>* ,, ?,

!"#

$7"%"%,"!"# -.!/ %&' ()*(+()),$-,-,./$$$

% .01%&' (),2()(342((5)()+ 5)(2$-,-,.

1 1

1011 + 7

$7"%"%,3%6!-7"!%&' (),2+ ()(3$-,-,./$ 7",3%6!-7"!

%&' ()*(()),42((5)()+5)(2$-,-,.

$7"%"%,3,%3!!"33!""7!3<!<! %&'42(($-,-,./$7%!" 7",3,%3!!"33!""7!3<!<!

%&' ()(3+()*(5)(2$-,-,.

8#1$9

10101 :

##&; 1 #"

1#1 ! #1+

$7"%"%)+

,%&' 5)()+5)(2$ -,-,.$7"0

,%&' (),2+()),$ -,-,.

16<1$9

=<1& $9 $7")+0 %#%!% .

= 1 1

7# 1 $7%!"7",3%*3*-"!#!

%&' (),2+()),5)()$-,-,.

=#1

< $7%!"7">,3,-3!

%&' (),2()(342((+5)(2$-,-,. @@@ ,(,2

76 ?$ %3.'

$ $

? '9 '

8& @

7& %$$ A

!.?(BB$-,(B? -(($-,(B 6

$=$ %"$C.D$$E )

.FG$

" 1$ C

$ $ #$ ( '&& #

A,"!" # -.!/ - "!0 1%%"!"% %/-!0 ! "3B $

@ # *3 *-"!#!,%!"33!""7!3<!<! 9 1$(B2*0(B2) $?

,3,--,(B%

00<0 ''. $

91$$$(B23

$ =$"$C D$ $ = %"C.G $ ,5,--,(B %

00<C '

. 6 & 6 ;

1 &

%$$ E;1&F. @ $$

' @ $=%"C.1$ $ $1 9 $

6 #

?$$$ $$ $&$=0= @ $ $ $ $

$=%"C. 1$ = $" $$ 6

(B,(-,(B%

00<C 9.;1&@ $

6"I 1

$%&'

(&& )* + &, $(-$$ # #$=0= 4,6 $

$ @ $

$1& 66+ =#

1-*+)

6 8 $ (-?$$ $ (B,(-,(B%

00<C 9..

8 @;1&0H &

,5,--,(B%

00<C '

.$ $4 =#

:@ :7 )2+B

6$ $ 6 76 ,3,--,(B%

00<C '

. 1$ = $" $$

?$$ =%"C. :

$$?

?(BB$-,(B 1 & 66 $ ? -(( $ -,(B # J $?,3,--,(B 1=#

=%"C.

J $ 1=#

6"I 1

!6!3,%43$!% .9

$ 6 ,5,--,(B

6H & $;1& J 1 $ 6;$9;1& & 1 $ =#

$ @

$ 6

17-4 8 @@

?(3,(-,-, ?

;1&H & $ $ $

$=%"C.$ 1$ 6

6"I 1

--,B-,,) A !6!3,%43"3 %#%!"3B )

&+5 ,' J $

,5,--,(B$H & ,3,--,(B

91$(B237 =%"C.

;1&H & $ $$ 6 $ "I 1

& !6!3 ,%43D$!- $ K

$ $ # $ $ $ 6$ 9 $

?(3,(-,-,%

(i) The draft Guidelines do not have any authenticity or legality (Para 48) (ii) The Selection Committee for selection to the post of DGP (HoPF) does not have any permission to adopt its own method. In terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prakash Singh's case (supra), the selection of DGP (HoPF) has to be made based on the three factors - the length of service; very good record and range of experience for heading the Police Force with emphasis on seniority. (Para 49) (iii) the Draft Guidelines are not contained in any official document, referable to any statute, cannot be permitted to defeat the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. (Para 50).

(iv) The procedure mentioned in Para 5.1, 6.1.2 and 6.1.3 of the

. Counter Affidavit of UPSC / Empanelment Committee is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and also such not mentioned in Minutes of meeting of Empanelment Committee dated 04.02.2019. (Para 50) (v) The Core Policing Areas are not relevant to the selection process (Para 51).

(vi) The selection process galvanized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prakash Singh's case has been ignored and defeated with impunity. A device procedure was evolved to choose the selection criteria in such a way that desired candidates are selected. (Para 55) (vii)In a selection process, when a person who is otherwise fit is sought to be overlooked, an indication is required to be given in a very brief and succinct manner. In present case, the Empanelment Committee does not give any indication as to what weighed in its mind to operate list of 12 Officers which was forwarded by State of Punjab with request to UPSC to send list of 6 officers fot it to pick two DGPs while list of all 12 officers was considered for selecting a panel of only 3 AND how the candidates at serial No. 6, 8 & 9 were selected in supercession of their seniors.

Failure to give reasons lead to conclusion that there are no valid reasons (Para 63). (viii) The reasons mentioned in the Counter Affidavit by UPSC for selecting the empanelled candidates or superceding the seniors are not in accord with the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prakash Singh's case (supra).(Para 63) (ix) The entire selection process and the consequential appointment is contrary to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prakash Singh's case (supra).(Para 63) (x) the Tribunal is not impressed with the pleading that Dinkar Gupta, the empanelled and appointed cadre Officer was named by the SIT constituted by Punjab and Haryana High Court to identify the nexus beyween senior officers & drug mafia since no specific order was passed nor any finding was recorded nor any proceedings pending against Dinkar Gupta.

$ $

(3,(-,-, 1 & 66 $

6$ $

11 =%"C.

$ H & $

$ $ $=%"C.

/ %1 & 66. $ $ $

;

?(3,(-,-,%

'. 1$ $&'()),$-,-,? $ 6

$&'()*($-,-,?$ 1& 66 ;'

@ 1$ $ &'

(3,(-,-, =$ -,,B$ 6H &

6"I 1

$ $=%"C.$$ & $$6

$ H &

6$ 61

,-*,!"3<! %<!B ) '5+';,9 &@

$K 6 "I 1

%# 1 L .$ $ =%"C. 6 $ $K " C

J 6$1

*3 $

(3,(-,-, 1 & J $ $ $ @

A FA& I$ -, &

& $ &

0 @

$ & 6 ;

@1$ # before approaching the Tribunal, the applicants in OAs before the Tribunal have not availed the alternative remedy under Rule 16 of All India Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1969, by preferring appeal to the Central Government against any order of the State Government which has the effect of superseding them in promotion to a Selection Post. Thus in view of such alternative remedy being available, the Tribunal acted without jurisdiction in entertaining and disposing of the matter.

Further, under Section 20 (1) of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, the Tribunal has travelled beyond the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Prakash Singh's case by declaring the Draft Guidelines framed by the UPSC in the year 2009 as illegal and arbitrary, ;8 9 $1$ - $=$ -,,B$$ $91$ #$= 4,6 $ $ $6 9

$(-$$ $ !$ $;1& -,,B$

$ $ 6 $"L 1

1 L ;:

$"L

!6!3,%43D$!)-. (),(-,(B

"L 1

# :

16;1& $ $$$#$==

6H & $ ;1& @ "L 1

& (),(-,(B6K

$ 6 ;1&7

=$ $-,,B

$$ $"L 1

$"L 1

& @

' (3,(-,-,

6 @

@ $&' &'.

( '& 5#

E=#

& @

& 7+? F $? ),0(BB0-,(B%

$ ;$9+? .( '&'9 #

E=#

&@ + ? F ? ),0-((0-,(B%1& 66 ;$9+? .

6 =#

(3,(-,-, @

6"L 1

& !6!3,%43 %#%!2

&)5+,)'+ @ ' 61$ 6 $ $;1&0H &

& +

K )(-)(5$ $

6;1&0H & $@

H &

E $K $ CF9

68@

$ # 6 H &

$"L 1

!6!3,%43D 9

8 @

6 %=#

. $$ $ $

K $ 6H & 9 (,6 =#

K $-M +* 9 -M 2 8 +? %& .(M5 46

6 6 $"L 1

, ? !.!%!3 "3B2

;)'

+,';A

,*,!"3%<!

%<! "3B '5)';+,9 &

1 &

$ 1& & %%0(%" "%"%:&'&#

$ 6;1&

( H & -

# J $(3,(-,-,

?(BB$-,(BE

;$9 &'5)(2$-,-,A % -/0%$,%$ 11%%!-,%!"33!""7!3<!<!"3B $ ?$ 61& 66

?(3,(-,-,;1&

$ !6!3,%43)-.9 $

E F $ $E F $ $

& $ $ 6$=$ $ -,,B 6@

;1& $ & $ $$= 01 > & 6 $ # K $ J $10;@ ;$9 9 "I 1

!6!3,%43D$!)-. $

$$ $ 0

$=%"C.$ ;1&$ $

=$ $-,,B$ @ ;1&0H & # $&'()),$-,-,$

&8 ! 1& 66 $&'42((-,-,

1 :

6H &

6;1& $=%"C.

$=#

=%"C. 6

1$ 9 '#

$' %&'(),20-,-, &'()(30-,-,()*(0-,-,+()),0-,-,.$ 61$ =#

& ?-(,(-,-,

$ 6 $ $

? (3,(-,-,

$ " &$16 $ $$ %.

$%"%!#00E##%F%4"3-1/#0%4%/0 7!0##%$#$%!"% = $ @ $ 6/ %. 1!"%!0""

,#!1"#"37!0 ##%$J E $HK F

,%!0%$""#%0!!##%!%"%%$!"%4 $%!"%#0!"%!1"#"37!0 ##%$"3$%"%!#A !4#F7%$B 5 9&'()),$-,-,;1& $

4;1&

5 & $

6-(,(-,-,

6 & &'(),2 $-,-,@

4;1&

5H & #$ 5'

@"I 1

=%-.%4(.

$ --,B-,,) !6!3 ,%43D $! -

;1& #$ ?$$ $

$=%"C.1 0

= %"C. $

"3 % 1" ##%$ # "3

" 7!"1"17!00/<"3

, 5 9 $ 6;1& !6!3,%43D$! $ "I 1

# $0!

$ $=%"C.9

$ ;1&

6"I 7 6" & ' -*-20-,,2'-**-0-,,2 $A 6

1&#6I #

$=$ 1$ ;1& A=$ $-,,BI 6 0 $ $$6$ $$$ $ $=%"C. 3!#"-%0%E#%0%"3D/0,-71-"%"3 <!

0!<%4E"3#00E%41!0%"% %.

& $H & %. N$ %. $1$H %.

1!$ %.

6H & %.

$ 58 @ "I 1

& # 1 L

$ $ ?$$ $

$=%"C.$;1&$ $

@ =$ -,,B2 $ 6 ;1&$ $ !

$ $$ $ $=%"C. ! 6

# "I 1

$ 6 $ $

9 ;1&$ 6"I 1

$=$ 5: @=$ $ "I 1

?(),(-,(B

6"I 1

!6!3 ,%43D$! - $ K

$ $ 6;1& --,B-,,) ,4,3-,(2 5; @=$ -,,B $ -21

$ 6 -,(, !$

$$ 91$&

#$=2 4,6 $

$ $6

$0&

6L $ K L 5& 9 H & ,5,--,(B$ ?$$ $ $=%"C.$ 1$ (- ?$$ #$ = 4,6 $ 9

(-$$ $

6"I 1

--,B-,,) ,4,3-,(2

$ 1 & 66 $

AJ I 6H & A $K I

6 & $

intelligence ?

Law and order ?

Administration ?

Investigation & ?

Security 59 @H & $0!-&'$=$ -,,B$

E!4# F7%$B $ # $ 7$-0%!!$%"%$!0$%$-1"!$ $1$ * & 6A I6

55 9

J ? (4,4-,(B

6 "I 1

!6!3,%43D$! - "I

$ ,4,3-,(B $

$= 6;1&

6 $1 $

$ $ K 9 $ 6 ;1& $

$H & ,5,--,(B $ $ $=%"C. $ 6

$;1&

$ (-$$ 6H &

$ $ 6 $K $

. C @

E $K F$ $$ 0!""<!%!% ; 0%$%4 !! -!%1-0< 0$"2 # J $1 6H & $;1& 5'

@ ;1& A $ K I $E F $ H & $ $

$$$

9 $

&' (),2$-,-,+

$ -(,(-,-,

1$ $!##%!%"(B,--,-,

% & '( ( )

**+ , - .

In this regard, the State of Punjab has stated that the criteria for fixing the number of eligible panel officers for consideration for empanelment for appointment as DGP is as per the requirement of the UPSC as laid down in + / of the UPSC framed in 2009 read with orders pass by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 310 1996 i.e. 0 1 and reliance is placed directions given in sub Para (a) and (f) of the Order dated 03.07.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under :

# $

% &&&&&& '%

/ " (

" " %

% 9 $$(B,--,-,# ,4,3-,(2 6(B,(-,(B 1$ $ $(-$$ $ !$ -$;1& -,,B9 $ (- ?$$ 1 H 6 8 ,4,3-,(2$"I 1

6 $$ -6 %$.$,4,3-,(2 6 ,2% .

$$ $ !$ ;1& -,,B @ $1

$1 & 66

(BB$-,(B ?

-,($-,(B

6 $@

$(-?$$ H 68 $2 ?$$ 9 "I 1

$$$ !$ $ = $ @

6;1&

-,,B=$ $ $$

$"I 1

!6!3,%43D$!)-7!.

$ #$ 2 3 0 ' )

4 " &) 5 As regards the material supplied to the UPSC, it is stated in

0 the affidavit that complete and upto date ACR dossiers of the 8 eligible officers were enclosed in original with the letter dated 19.01.2019 of the State Government. Thereafter, pursuant to the request made by UPSC, the State Government vide letter dated 21.01.2019 forwarded the PAR / ACR dossiers of the 4 officers initially excluded from the Eligibility List along with duly filled in and certified performas provided by the UPSC.

It is stated that the material / records in totality were provided to the UPSC for assessment of the officers, and no material was segregated specifically for the "range of experience" as per Para 5 of the UPSC Guidelines which lays down the complete material to be provided to UPSC by the State Government.

It is added that the "

# ) of Indian Police Service Officers has been defined and prescribed in Rule 2 (g) and 3 of the All India Service (Performance Appraisal Report) Rules 2007 and the relevant Rules are reproduced in the Affidavit which are also reproduced hereinunder for ready reference:

"F2 (g) "performance appraisal dossier" means the compilation of the performance appraisal reports written on a member of the service, referred to in Rule 3, and include such other documents as may be specified by the Central Government, by general or special order, in this behalf.

Maintenance in custody of performance appraisal dossier ? a comprehensive performance appraisal dossier shall be maintained for each member of the service by the State Government and the Central Government in the manner specified under these rules and the performance appraisal dossier shall consist of the documents specified in Schedule?I Schedule?I (See Rule 3) documents to be maintained in the performance appraisal dossier (i) A curriculum vitae to be updated annually on the basis of the performance appraisal reports and a five? yearly curriculum vitae submitted by the officer reported upon.

(ii) The performance appraisal reports earned throughout

the career (iii) Certificates of training, academic courses attended after joining service, study leave (iv) Details of books, articles and other publications (v) Appreciation letters from Government or Secretary or Head of department or special bodies or Commissions (vi) Reports of medical checkups (vii) All India Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1969 and the final result of inquiry into allegations and charges against a member of the Service.

(vii) warnings or displeasure or reprimands of the Government.

9 ? -(,(-,(,

6 & &'(),2$-,-,

$1 8-B3,-B3($ -,-, $"I 1

6?,3,--,-, '' = $$

$' & ,-,3-,-,

& **320-,-,&'()),$-,-, $ J $ ;1& 1.

What is the number fixed for zone of consideration for the empanelment of eligible officers for the post of DGP (HoPF) as per the Draft Guideline 2009?

If there is no number fixed for the zone of consideration in Draft Guidelines 2009 then whether the DoPT Guidelines and instructions are relied and followed to regulate the zone of consideration for the consideration of the eligible officers for the empanelment for the post of DGP (HoPF). 3.

In the case under (ii) above, if the DoPT guidelines and instructions are not followed and relied then it may clearly be stated as to what is the process / mode followed by UPSC for restricting/ regulating the zone of consideration among all the officers eligible as per the Draft Guidelines 2009? 4.

If there is no restriction for the zone of consideration then whether all officers eligible as per the Draft Guidelines 2009 are required to be considered irrespective of their number vis a vis the number of post of DGP (HoPF) to be filed? 5.

Does the UPSC insists/ asks for the forwarding of the list / dossiers of all the officers eligible as per the Draft Guidelines 2009 or leaves it to the discretion of the State to forward and

send the list/ dossiers of officers eligible as per the Draft Guidelines 2009 as the zone of consideration for the empanelment of officers for the post of DGP (HoPF) of different States?

What is the pan India practice regarding the number of officers in the zone of consideration for empanelment of DG (HoPF) for different States.

UPSC is directed to prepare and produce the Chart regarding the consideration made by UPSC / Empanelment Committee for the post of DGP (HoPF) of different States in the last five years depicting:?

(i) How many officers were eligible as per Draft Guideline 2009 for each of such consideration? (ii) How many such officers were called for / considered for empanelment in each such consideration?

(iii) Whether the Zone of consideration was restricted/ regulated as per the relevant DoPT guidelines/ instructions and/ or what criteria whatsoever was followed?

(iv) What was the inter?se seniority of the empanelled Officers among the officers eligible as per the Draft Guideline 2009?

Lastly, if all officers eligible as per the Draft Guidelines 2009 are to be considered without any regulation/ restriction of the zone of consideration among such eligible officers then would such practice not violate the mischief sought to be curtailed/ removed by Prakash Singh's case?

' @

;1&%

4.&'()),$ -,-, $ ##%!%" !"

% $170%!$ " "3 %$"% %-

J 6&

' '

$K$

!$ --,B-,,) ;1& $=%"C. 6

6"L 1

'%&.4(,0(BB) !6!3,%43D$!)-.

--,B-,,) $ ;1&

$ $$$ $

=%&$$.-,,B'$

Length of Service ii.

'Very Good' Service Record iii.

Range of Experience for heading the police force $ $ $$ !6!3,%43D$!

$6 ' @;1&

-%0%

+!77/<"3=/0,-71-"% !"'& '

%9 61$ .'

%99 61 $ @

. !6!3 ,%43D 7 $

;1& -$ -,,B $$ $91$ #$= 4, 6 $ $ $ 6 ! $ $

$=%"C. ' 8 @ ;1& 6

6=@ $

$$$ $=%"C. $=@$= & %=&.

0 $

$ $ $$ $ $=%"C.

;1& 6 6$-,,B

6"L 1

' :

@;1& $ !$

-$=$ $-,,B # 5%7.%5. $ 6 $ " $$

(*,((BBB

$91 11< 111

@ 1 1

@ 1 6 E

" F%K 40999 $$-,,3-,-,.9$ (*,((BBB 9 %7.%5. ! $ $

6$ $

$=!$ $$

4,6 $ ' ; ?

$J 6 6& 14 ,-,3-,-,

0 $ 6;1&$ 0

!$ $$ =$ -,,B;1& =@ $=&$

$ $$ $ $=%"C. $$ %

. $

! $ ;1& -,,B 6 & $ 6# --,B-,,),4,3-,(2+(4,4-,(B 6"L 1

!6!3,%43D$!)-. 9

6"L 1

,4,3-,(2

$ %

$ $&

' ( ! & $ ') @ ,4,3-,(2 $(4,4-,(B

" "L 1

E $

6 $ $ $$ $

K $$ ) $ F7

;1&

"L 1

# 1 I

% . ;1& !$ $ $$ not below of the rank of ADG (may vary from state to state depending upon availability of ADG.

who have completed 30 years of service.

who have residual service of atleast 6 months. ' & @J 6 6 & 1*? ,-,3-,-, $61 $ +

$$$ =$

-,,B$ $$$ $ $=%"C.;1&

1 6 # 6;1& $ $ $$ $-,,B1 6 !$ 6$1 $$$ $ $J $ 6

$;1& @;1& KAI%K 409 $$-,,3-,-,. 6;1&0 & $ $=%"C.$$$ ,*6 ' 9 @;1& $K 6

$ $

# < --,B-,,) !6!3,%43D $! )-. "3%4!2"3=/0,-71-"%!"

'5%$"1%"%%"</"3"/4%-E%43"!4 !"3!%E!!1%=/0,-71-" !"'8 '

2 E3%2%" E! %$" "3!"$11!"%# !77%"1"""37"# )

+/<

,3-0/- 2 & 1 @ $$ $

=%"C. 691 & $$ 6 ;1&0 H &

$$ ! $ K @ $ K

J 6 $ $

$ $ !6!3,%43D $!)-7!.

J ,4,3-,(2+(4,4-,(B ' 5 @;1& 95BB,$-,-,$ '%&. 4(, $ (BB) !6!3 ,%43D $! )-. $ "L 1

6 $@

# K $ $ 4, 6 =$ "I 1

$ -,,B K 1 $@

6 K 1$@

8 6;1&$$-,,3-,-,

$H & $ 1 (-4 $ 9 H (23- @

$ & $ 6$$6

$ +

$ +$ '8 @;1&&'5)(2$-,-, $ (),4-,-, 1 $$ $ 6 1 & 66 %

All the members of Empanelment Committee reach a consensus, as to what norms have to be applied for assessing the suitability of the officers in light of the circumstances and situation peculiar to the State and are essential for manning the post of DGP (HoPF) in that State. ii.

Thereafter, the Committee proceed to assess the suitability of officers based on criteria on length of service, very good service record, range of experience for heading the Police Force and residual service on the assessment sheet which is an internal confidential record.

iii.

The Assessment Sheet / Working Sheet is signed by all the Members of the Committee.

iv.

Based on the signed Assessment Sheet, the Minutes are prepared & signed. Both the Minutes and the Assessment Sheet are made part of the file.

The Minutes merely record the gist of what is decided at the meeting and are the Memorandum of Proceedings which do not contain detailed reasons for the decision. vi.

The Minutes of Committee are revealed as per practice & norms being followed- the existence of the Assessment Sheet is not revealed/ mentioned since the same is part of internal working of the Commission.

vii.

The Commission claims privilege for production of such Assessment Sheet.

@;1&

@= 1 # ;16 ;1& $@

,2,(-,-, 6K $

1 $ @

( 1 & 66 # ; 16 @

,2,(-,-,K $

1 $ @

$ + @= # ;16;1& $$,2,(-,-,1 #&$

. ;1&$ @

1 $

1 $ "I <

8 6 6 6

1 $ 7 =?(*,(-,-, = # ;16;1& 6 &

I (*,(-,-,1 1 & $ &

&@ 7 = $ $ H $& +

$ "I <

8 6&@ 7 = (),(-,-, $ 1 1;1&

$"I & (),(-,-, #

$ $&

$?,2,(-,-,&

111 1

"I & J ?

$ $ $

+ $ 4-1"#"3 !"% ':

&'()),$-,-,$ 6 1$

61 8#8 1 $9

$;1&

% -/0%$,%$11%% i.

The impugned order dated 17.01.2020 is structured by the false assumptions that Draft Guidelines 2009 issued by UPSC pursuant to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parkash Singh's case (supra) are non?est being in contravention of the judgment. In this regard, submission is supported by the fact that Supreme Court has adverted to these guidelines in its orders and UPSC has enforced these guidelines uniformly in all appointments of DGP across the country in last 11 years.

ii.

No specific malafides or bias has been raised and composition of High Level Committee does not leave any scope for malafides or bias to come into place as the members of the Selection Committee are from varied sources and different backgrounds from relevant field. iii.

As per the UPSC, the Tribunal has passed the impugned decision dated 17.01.2020 on complete misreading of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parkash Singh's case (supra) as also the order dated 03.07.2018 passed therein which emphasizes on merit alone having due regard to seniority.

The impugned order dated 17.01.2020 has been passed in contravention of the principles laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in respect of scope of judicial review of expert bodies in relation to matter of selection / exams and reliance is placed on judgment in M. Sathiyapriya, S.K. Goyal & R.S. Dars. Reliance is also placed on *# # +, %

- +, ).

The impugned order is also assailed on the ground that the Tribunal has not adverted to relevant aspects highlighted in the counter affidavit by UPSC and ignored the fact of assessment mentioned in the minutes and in particular the submission that assessment sheets are not in public domain in larger public interest and such non disclosure has been upheld by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Writ Petition (Civil) 13808 of 2019 "Jagmohan Sigh Rajiv vs. Union of India". vi.

The Draft Guidelines?2009 incorporate all the four broad components laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prakash Singh's case and other features added towards the working of the modalities towards the exercise of empanelment of officers for appointment as DGP (HoPF) donot violate the broad components and are on a uniform basis.

vii.

The Empanelment Committee is an impartial body of high ranking officers who have assessed the Officers for empanelment for appointment as DGP (HoPF) for the State of Punjab on 04.02.2019, duly recorded in the Minutes of Meeting. In this regard the Tribunal is wrong in observing that the minutes of Meeting are not reflecting any merit whereas the fact of the matter is that the merit is not required to be shown in the Minutes of the Meeting which are only the memorandum of proceedings and do not contain detailed reasons for the decision while the

0 Assessment Sheets are the internal working sheets where such deliberations are made. It is argued that the argument that there are no reasons given for the assessment / empanelment of officers is also flawed as no reasons are required to be given towards the assessment and empanelment of one officer over the other officer. viii.

It is argued that the Draft Guidelines?2009 are '

as the same are the modalities framed towards implementing the broad parameters laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prakash Singh's case () in the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution entrusting the task of empanelling the officers for the post of DGP (HoPF) and checks and balances have been created in the Draft Guidelines ?2009.

ix.

Mr Aman Lekhi, the Ld Senior Counsel has argued that it is nobody's case that the Draft Guidelines are bad, rather a comparison is drawn by the Private Respondents / Applicants in OAs that as per the Draft Guidelines 2009 and the Core Policing Areas, they are better in comparison to the empanelled Officers and are projecting the arguments as it suits them as per the situation for and against the Draft Guidelines.

The findings of the Tribunal are also flawed on the ground that the Tribunal assumed that 'seniority' is the genesis for empanelment of Officers for appointment as DGP (HoPF) whereas the judgment in Prakash Singh's case () read with the various orders in the IA therein shows the stress on 'merit' with due regard to 'seniority'.

xi.

The Tribunal has completely ignored the Order dated 16.01.2019 passed in the IA filed by the State of Punjab in Prakash Singh's case (supra) wherein satisfaction regarding the procedure for empanelment through the Committee adopted by the UPSC is recorded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

xii.

It is held by the Tribunal also that no malafides is pleaded or made out in the case and there is no foundation and basis for bias made out or pleaded in the case.

xiii.

There is no basis or foundation that the criteria adopted by way of Core Policing Areas so adopted by the Empanelment Committee are tailor made and that the SIT report so relied has no relevance and concern with the Empanelment Committee meeting.

xiv.

It is lastly contended that there are inherent contradictions in the impugned judgment dated 17.01.2020 which leaves to the conclusion that proper reasoning is missing in the judgment and conclusions have been reached without any basis.

@;1&

&'5)(2$ -,-,

'& ,"!"# -.!/ @1$

6 ;

$ i.

The order dated 03.07.2018 passed in Parkash Singh's case (supra) mandates that all the Legislation / Rules of the State Government or the Central Government running counter to the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court are kept in abeyance. In view of the above, the Punjab Police Act, 2007 and / or the DOPT Rules & Regulations were not be applicable in context of appointment of DGP (HoPF). ii.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parkash Singh's case (supra) has observed that it has power to exercise jurisdiction under Article 32 read with Article 142 & 144 of the Constitution of India to issue guidelines to be followed and be operative till the new legislation is enacted by the State Governments. In this regard, reliance is placed on Para 29 of Parkash Singh's judgment (2006) 8 SCC 1.

iii.

The State of Punjab relies on Article 321 of the Constitution of India to submit that an act of the parliament or state legislature can provide for additional functions to be performed by UPSC or the State PSC as respects the service of the Union or the State. It was in this context reference is made to the UPSC Guidelines as no enactment has been made in this regard and in the absence thereof the Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India entrusted the UPSC with the responsibility for appointment of DGP in the States conforming to the judgment in Parkash Singh's case.

In view of the above submissions, it is contended by the State of Punjab that the legal framework of UPSC Guidelines is sui generis and cannot be curtailed by any rules or regulations issued by DOPT and in this regard, reliance is also placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in * / 0% / ) (1999) 2 SCC 131.

In the background of the aforestated legal submissions, the State of Punjab has contended that they have strictly complied with the guidelines of the UPSC and in reference thereto the State of Punjab has sent information with respect to all officers falling within the zone of consideration as defined in Para 2 of the UPSC Guidelines without leaving any eligible candidate. It is submitted by the State of Punjab that the finding of the tribunal that 12 names were forwarded with anticipation of a panel of 06 names is completely erroneous and relies on letter dated 19.01.2019 sent by State of Punjab to the UPSC demonstrating that the State had sent the names, Bio?

data, ACRs of all such officers who were fulfilling the rank criteria being working in the rank of DGP/ ADGP, completed 30 years of service as per the seniority and gradation list of 01.01.2019. Regarding the argument in respect of panel of 06 officers sought by the State of Punjab it has been contended that the request for panel of 06 officers to be returned was made on the premise that since there were two sanctioned DGP Posts in Punjab, therefore, a panel of 06 names would be required.

twice the number of sanctioned posts of DGP.

It is also submitted by the State of Punjab that the non forwarding of the details of any of the officers who fell within the zone of consideration would have amounted to violation of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India and in this regard reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in *1% 2%

+, ) (2013) 16 SCC 440.

vii.

The State of Punjab has countered the argument that the core policing areas criteria was tailor made to favour some officers and in this regard reference is made to Para 4.17, Ground XII and Para 8(Relief Sought) in OA No.60/199/CH/2019. In this regard, it is submitted that the original applicant has alleged in its replication to UPSC's affidavit before CAT that no criteria in nature of "Core Policing Areas" was at all considered by UPSC while on the other hand it is contended that the suitability of the candidates was assessed in a completely tailor made fashion which runs contrary to each other.

'9 %6!-7"!2"3E%"7"%"%%( '& 5#

( '&'9#

The written submissions furnished by the UPSC are adopted & reiterated and reliance is placed on the affidavit dated 14.02.2020 and 20.07.2020 filed by the UPSC.

ii.

It is submitted that the UPSC Guidelines of 2009 are framed by UPSC pursuant to directions by the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India issued in case of Parkash Singh (supra). The said guidelines of 2009 have been placed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. iii.

Reliance has been placed on the subsequent orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parkash Singh's case (supra) with specific reference to order dated 13.03.2019 (2019) 4 SCC 1, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has emphasized that the appointments to the posts of DGP shall be purely on merit.

iv.

The UPSC guidelines have been uniformly applied in terms of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and from 2009 onwards has been applied on 28 occasions. v.

In reference to the issue regarding State of Punjab, wherein, a panel of 3 candidates have been prepared by the UPSC and applying the principles of seniority, the name of Petitioner in CWP No.1608 of 2020 has been placed at Sr. No.1 at the said list and the principles of "merit & seniority" has been duly applied in the present case. Regarding the zone of consideration, it is submitted that the zone of consideration by UPSC is completely conditioned by requirement of minimum of 30 years of experience which has been specifically endorsed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parkash Singh's case supra.

vi.

It is contended that the Tribunal did not possess jurisdiction to quash the guidelines framed by UPSC pursuant to directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Article 142 in Parkash Singh's case (supra) and the observations by Tribunal that the draft guidelines do not have authenticity or legality are totally erroneous.

vii.

The Tribunal also committed serious error in concluding that the empanelment committee did not proceed within parameters laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. viii.

The Tribunal committed error in concluding that though no reasons are required to be recorded by the Selection Committee still gave its conclusion to the contrary and disregarded the law laid down in Union of India vs. Samar Singh & Others (1996) 10 SCC 555 and National Institute of Mental Health & Neurosciences vs. Dr. K. Kalyana Raman & Others" (1992) Supp. (2) SCC 481.

ix.

In this regard it is contended that though reasons were not required to be given but still the reasons were duly recorded for assessing the range of experience of the candidates in the assessment sheet and in this regard reliance is placed on Para 15 of written statement dated 14.02.2020 filed by UPSC in CWP No.1660 of 2020.

It is contended that the assessment sheets are claimed to be unpublished record which is not shared/ disclosed in public domain but the same were placed before the Tribunal in a sealed cover and in these circumstances there was no occasion to hold that there existed no reasons on the record. In this regard, reliance is placed on Para 14 of written statement dated 14.02.2020 filed by UPSC in CWP No.1660 of 2020.

It is concluded that in view of the settled law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court the findings of the Tribunal are entirely unsustainable and liable to be set aside.

'5 *3 *-"!#! ) 7" ; % ( '&&

It is submitted that the power of judicial review is an inherent power with the Hon'ble High Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. ii.

It is argued that the present appointment of DGP (HOPF) made by the UPSC has not been made in exercise of its powers & functions under Article 320 of the Constitution of India and in the selection committee which has done the selection/ recommendation, one of the members of UPSC alone has been appointed as President. On that premise, it is contended that it is extremely false to say that the UPSC has given its recommendation & guidelines with the stamp of approval from the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

iii.

It is argued by the Respondent No.5 that the dispute is regarding the procedure & method adopted by the empanelment committee which is stated to be not akin to the procedure & method adopted by UPSC. It is submitted that once on the method of selection of empanelment, the committee has found the Respondent No.5 to be fit then it could not declare him unfit subsequently on the basis of procedure to be observed by them.

iv.

The Respondent No.5 has argued that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parkash Singh's case (supra) gave very categoric directions that the selection was to be done on the basis of length of service, very good record range of experience, residual tenure & merit coupled with seniority and on these parameters the committee found the Respondent No.5 to be

fit but thereafter on the parameters formulated by the Committee which are alien to the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Respondent No.5 is declared unfit to be empanelled. Thus, it is contended that the criteria for assessment is alien to the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court which is formulated by the Empanelment Committee under Para 6 of Guidelines and not by UPSC.

It is the case of the Respondent No.5 that the stand taken by the UPSC/ Empanelment Committee that the assessment was done on the basis of parameters like intelligence, law & order, administration, investigation & security is not borne from the minutes of meeting at all and no such documents have been shown to this Court that such an assessment was on the basis of the aforesaid criteria, therefore, such a stand is only an afterthought.

vi.

It is contended that the criteria on the aforestated 5 parameters was tailor made. It is argued that the criteria of selection has to be formulated prior to the selection process and in any case before the dossiers of candidates are brought before the selection committee in order to eliminate bias & malafides. Whereas, in the case in hand the dossiers of the candidates were available with empanelment committee on 19.01.2019 while only on 04.02.2019 the parameters were formulated and as such the parameters are tailor made.

vii.

It is argued that the core policing areas consisting 20 parameters out of which the empanelment committee who have dossiers of the candidates, picked up five of these core policing areas which have no nexus with the work profile of the DGP of the State of Punjab out of which four were tailor made qua the selected candidates and on this basis the assessment, recommended his case for empanelment. viii.

The Respondent No.5 has relied on a detailed comparative chart placed on record showing the range of experience even in the short listing core policing areas, wherein, it is claimed that the Respondent No.5 is having much larger & wider range of experience than the selected candidate. With the aforestated submissions the writ petitions by UPSC, State of Punjab & Dinkar Gupta have been countered.

,%3!"3!3!""7!3<!<)

* &' ()*($-,-,&'42(($-,-, '

1 8 1

*1& 66&'()*( $-,-, &'42(($-,-,

* &

=11 =#

&'-,4*B$-,(4 11 +1=#

$ = 1 1 & 66 9 K 1 $ & $ ?$$ $=%"C.$1$ J

1& 66 '

1 $& $ $

H &

6 $ $

$ 61& ?

6"L 1

!6!3 ,%43D$!%-. $ 6 + 6 $ $ $ $

$(- $

1$ '

8 9

6$&

$ J $ ,5,--,(B

$ $ $ $

* 1& 66 $;1&

$ $ "I & $&@+$ ;1&

# '

; @

$ 6

6;1& @

H & $;1&? $ $"L 1

& A*!!6>!0 13!,%43%B'

;9 ),+: ; A,-71-"$!"

$ $%!"%"3

%#%!B%

.% '&+;,5 5A,"!"# -.!/ !% !0 ,%43 3-00! "3B % ''+ ': , 99 A7",%43?!30 "3,"!"# -.!/ "3B %

&+'',8;& ?

1 6;1&81& $"L 1

A,"!"# -.!/ ,3%,-63,%43B'

& ),+:

8A,"!"#

!.!!% "3B '

&; ),+5&; A 70 %#%%0>%/"% "3 %#%! "3B

: ),+':: A,"!"# !<!!?-4B

)'+,5

1 7

6 &

$$ $

?1& A !1.%",%43 ?!!1,!.?-1! "3B

) +,:

'A?*!.- ,"!"# "3B

5) +,& A%1!%*!03"! %43-"#03%B

5)9+,''A?!1!0?-1!-7"!

,"!"#!<!! "3B'

' ) -.!/+''5

,-3!2 7";%( 85''#

$ 61

*&'42(($-,-,$ 61& 6 @ $11 =

J $H & ;1& -5,(-,(B

1 = %"?C. $ H & 6 $ @

* $" 1& $$

6 36?-1!!! ,"!"#!<!!2)'

5;+:,:'9%

+',889 9 $

1& 6

$ $ $$ $ $H & $ (),(-,(B# 1 I

6"L 1

9$ 61$ # $ $=%"C. =$ -,,B

-,,3 @6 $

-5,(-,(B+-2,(-,(B ;1&1$ $ H &

9 6

$ $ 9

$ +

$ 6#

. $ 6 6 @

$$11 $"I 1

36?-1!!!H ,"!"#!<!!)'

5;+,:'9 $ 1& &

$ & 6 $$

6 $

$@ $ ;1& &

4-,$ & $9

$ $ $ 6K 6 @ $

6$$

6E*!!6>!0H 13!,%43% B)'

;9+ , ;9;

# $ $ $

$ $

1 6 E?-1!*!!0H%6!%4!1>"H %.!,3!6 !"B)

'+','5 I-"%#"1%!"% ' C $

6 $ J $$

$ "I & 9

#$ ) 6 *%7 (. 8 9

- ;< 9 ' *,(

/ # ",( 5$= # $ #$ + / ; (. 0 ) ' ) +/ #8 >$) . )) * *

0 1#)$ ,( .' ( = #($ 9( ) (.?') ' '' ' ) @ &) 10% ( * 0)' 0 1 #)$ %< 9 ) * = #$ *% #$ #($(*- ,( ( = #!$#$ ) 6 *% ' ') ' (.0 7 ?') ' ''= #($ ,( & )% 6 *% +/ #8 >$(. 0 >(. ;= # $ ') ,( ( ( 4 = !0<% #$ ) 6 *%7 (. 8 9

- ;< 9,= 7$ $

< (3,(-,-,

6"I 1

$ --)0--3$& $9$

$'$ &

6& 0@

9 $E,<!6/?, !3!6%3! , %'

&: :99.& 7$"I 1

$ $

0 6& @

E3"3<

3 &4

5& 4

5 & 4

5 & 4 ( 2 1-- 2' 93$ < $7.

The question about the limits of the jurisdiction of High Courts in issuing a writ of certiorari under Article 226 has been frequently considered by this Court and the true legal position in that behalf is no longer in doubt. A writ of certiorari can be issued for 6 committed by inferior courts or Tribunals: these are cases where orders are passed by inferior courts or tribunals %6 , or is & , or as a &6 . A writ can similarly be issued where in & 6 - ,(

.)) .- as for instance, it decides a question without giving an opportunity, be heard to the party affected by the order, or where the procedure adopted in dealing with the dispute is opposed to principles of natural justice. There is, however, no doubt that the jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari is a supervisory jurisdiction and the Court exercising it is not entitled to act as an appellate Court. This limitation necessarily means that findings of fact reached by the inferior Court or Tribunal as result of the appreciation of evidence cannot be reopened or questioned in writ proceedings. 9 %%)) ( (.%-( -%**'.))( :

(.,( -% ( % - ,( . ' '(

' * - . ' '( * %

') 0' .- ( * - % ( %% (

(.% In dealing with this category of cases, however, we must always bear in mind that a finding of fact

recorded by the Tribunal cannot be challenged in proceedings for a writ of certiorari on the ground that the relevant and material evidence adduced before the Tribunal was insufficient or inadequate to sustain the impugned finding. The adequacy or sufficiency of evidence led on a point and the inference of fact to be drawn from the said finding are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Tribunal, and the said points cannot be agitated before a writ Court. It is within these limits that the jurisdiction conferred on the High Courts under Article 226 to issue a writ of certiorari can be legitimately exercised (vide Hari Vishnu Kamath v. Syed Ahmad Ishaque[(1955) 1 SCR 1104] Nagandra Nath Bora v. Commissioner of Hills Division and Appeals Assam [(1958) SCR 1240] and Kaushalya Devi v. Bachittar Singh [AIR 1960 SC 1168]

6"I 1

6K " &

& $

$ $ 6 $

$ $

$ @

-0<#-"!1%"!1%%/0!1!"%!0%$3! -0<!1%""%!1%%/0%$ $

$ $ $$%/!%$9

$$ $

6 $ 9 K$$ E

F E< F

$ A

$ J K $

$ $ A< I 6$ $

" @ $ 6 " &

6 9!!77! !4!77!2 '

;; , ;

"I 1

& $ 9

$ 6 & E%"3-"%F$#%".-%%$"%9

"3-43$17""""-7!J-%<2!$"%#0!4!" %4!#"3-0#7$-%0!""37%$%70#!"-!0 .-"%$ 7

6 $

!1!%#"!77!""3 #!$#"37$%4/!!$0!%4!$%4!#"3 7%%#0!E!/$#F$#.-%%$"% 9 3!!4!3!! 31%$!0 (6 >" ,"!" # ,!-!3"!2 '

;9 , '; "I 1

J $ $$&

( -6 7

&3 3& 23 2& ) 8# ,"!"#3! !3,, !1 !2 '

&8,'9 8"I 1

$ $ $ 6 K

6$$ 6 6

$ --)

$"I 1

& -7?-1!?--,-%73!!3!6!/"<2

&)'+ ,;:2

J 6$ $@

@"I 1

$9!%H%3-?!1!"331!3!J-2),+)"%"-"%!0 $3+2 '

;;, 88

A21. Then the question is whether there are proper grounds for the issue of 'certiorari' in the present case. There was considerable argument before us as to the character and scope of the writ of 'certiorari' and the conditions under which it could be issued. The question has been considered by this Court in 'Parry and Co. v. Commercial Employees' Association, Madras', AIR 1952 Supreme Court 179 : ?'Veerappa Pillai v. Raman and Raman Ltd.'. AIR 1952 Supreme Court 192 ; ? 'Ebrahim Aboobaker v. Custodian General of Evacuee Property New Delhi', AIR 1952 Supreme Court 319 , and quite recently in AIR 1954 Supreme Court

440. On these authorities, the following propositions may be taken as established: (1) 'Certiorari' will be issued for 6 , as when an inferior Court or Tribunal %6 & -

&. (2) 'Certiorari' will also be issued when the Court or Tribunal

. & ( 6 , as when it decides without giving an opportunity to the parties to be heard, or violates the principles of natural justice. (3) The Court issuing a writ of 'certiorari' acts in exercise of a )*. ))

6 .

One consequence of this is that the Court will not review findings or fact reached by the inferior Court or Tribunal, even if they be erroneous. This is on the principle that a Court which has jurisdiction over a subject?matter has jurisdiction to decide wrong as well as right, and when the Legislature does not

" choose to confer a right of appeal against that decision, it would be defeating its purpose and policy if a superior Court were to re?hear the case on the evidence, and substitute its own findings in 'certiorari." These propositions are well settled and and not in dispute.

(4) The further question on which there has been some controversy is whether a writ can be issued, when the decision of the inferior Court or Tribunal is erroneous in law. This question came up for consideration in? 'A& * '(

') 9)) ,( B?&)0%C-;<DE , and it was held that when a Tribunal made a "speaking order" and the reasons given in that order in support of the decision were bad in law, 'certiorari' could be granted. It was pointed out by Lord Goddard, C. J. that that had always been understood to be the true scope of the power. (1878) 4 AC 30, and ? 'A& *

F4F C-;

9 , were quoted in support of this view.

In 1878?4 AC 30, Lord Cairns L. C. observed as follows :

If there was upon the face of the order of the court of quarter sessions anything which showed that that order was erroneous, the Court of Queen's Bench might be asked to have the order brought into it, and to look at the order, and view it upon the face of it, and if the court found error upon the face of it, to put an end to its existence by quashing it G

That supervision goes to two points; one is the area of the inferior jurisdiction and the qualifications and conditions of its exercise; the other is the observance of the law in the course of its exercise 5 The decision in 1951?1 KB 711, was taken in appeal, and was affirmed by the Court of Appeal in ?'Rex v. Northumberland Compensation Appeal Tribunal; Ex parte Shaw', 952?1 KB 338. In laying down that an error of law was a ground for granting certiorari' the learned Judges emphasised that it must be apparent on the face of the record. Denning, L. J. who stated the power in broad and general terms observed :

It will have been seen that throughout all the cases there is one governing rule: 'certiorari' is only available to quash a decision for error of law 'if the error appears on the face of

"" the record The position was thus summed up by, Morris, L. J. : It is plain that certiorari' will not issue as the cloak of an appeal in disguise. It does not lie in order to bring an order or decision for rehearing of the issue raised in the proceedings. It exists to correct error of law 'where revealed on the face of an order or decision', or irregularity, or absence of, or excess of, jurisdiction where shown.

In AIR 1952 Supreme Court 192, it was observed by this Court that under Article 226 the writ should be issued, in grave cases where the subordinate tribunals or bodies or officers act wholly without jurisdiction, or in excess of it, or violation of the principles of natural justice, or refuse to exercise a jurisdiction vested in them, or there is 'an error apparent on the face of the record' In 'AIR 1954 Supreme Court 440 ', the law was thus stated An error in the decision or determination itself may also be amenable to a writ of 'certiorari' but it must be a 'manifest error apparent on the face of the proceedings', e. g., when it is based on clear ignorance or disregard of the provisions of law. In other words, it is a patent error which can be corrected by 'certiorari' but not a mere wrong decision.

23. It may therefore be taken as settled that a writ of 'certiorari' could be issued to correct an error of law. But it is essential that it should be something more than a mere error; it must be one which must be manifest on the face of the record. The real difficulty with reference to this matter however, is not so much in the statement of the principle as in its application to the facts of a particular case. When does an error cease to be mere error, and become an error apparent on the face of the record? Learned Counsel on either side were unable to suggest any clear?cut rule by which the boundary between the two classes of errors could be demarcated.

@ = 7 $ & % %"<23!%4!3"!01%%"!"%%/-!02 3!%4!32

')8+,& 2

$ $ $@

6 "I

8. Before adverting to the respective arguments, we consider, it necessary to observe that a writ of certiorari can be issued for correcting errors of jurisdiction committed by inferior Courts or Tribunals. A writ can also be issued where in exercise of jurisdiction conferred on it, the Court or the Tribunal acts illegally or improperly i.e. it decides a question without giving an opportunity to be heard to the party affected by the order or where the procedure adopted by it is opposed to the principles of natural justice. However, it must be remembered that the jurisdiction of the High Court to issue a writ of certiorari is a supervisory jurisdiction and not appellate one.

This necessarily means that the finding of fact reached by the inferior Court or Tribunal, as a result of the appreciation of evidence, cannot be reopened or questioned in writ proceedings except when the judgment, order or award suffers from an error of law apparent on the face of the record. A finding of fact recorded by an inferior Court of Tribunal can be corrected only if it is shown that in recording the said finding the Court or the Tribunal had erroneously refused to admit admissible and material evidence or had erroneously admitted inadmissible evidence and the same has influenced the impugned finding. Similarly, a finding of fact based on no evidence would be regarded as an error of law which can be corrected by a writ of certiorari.

9 " & I K $ --3$& $9

6"I 1

$9,3!0%%,3<!1 ,3""< !.! ,3!6! !"%02 '

)5+ , 8 @

6"I 1

A62. On an analysis of the aforesaid decisions of this Court, the following principles on the exercise of High Court's jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution may be formulated : (a) A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is

" different from a petition under Article 227. The mode of exercise of power by High Court under these two Articles is also different.

(b) In any event, a petition under Article 227 cannot be called a writ petition. The history of the conferment of writ jurisdiction on High Courts is substantially different from the history of conferment of the power of Superintendence on the High Courts under Article 227 and have been discussed above.

(c) High Courts - ) - in exercise of its power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution, % ( or Courts inferior to it. - & )%- )) over the orders of Court or tribunal subordinate to it. In cases where an *.

' ( )* -% ) on the exercise of this power by the High Court.

(d) The parameters of interference by High Courts in exercise of its power of superintendence have been repeatedly laid down by this Court. In this regard the High Court must be guided by the principles laid down by the Constitution Bench of this Court in Waryam Singh (supra) and the principles in Waryam Singh (supra) have been repeatedly followed by subsequent Constitution Benches and various other decisions of this Court.

(e) According to the ratio in Waryam Singh (supra), followed in subsequent cases, the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction of superintendence can interfere in order only to keep the tribunals and Courts subordinate to it, C% ( .C.

(f) In order to ensure that law is followed by such tribunals and Courts by & 6 %* ' (. &6 %* '.

(g) Apart from the situations pointed in (e) and (f), High Court can interfere in exercise of its power of superintendence when there has been a ) )*. in the orders of tribunals and Courts subordinate to it or where

". there has been a ' 6 or the () ) 6*(

(h) In exercise of its power of superintendence High Court cannot interfere to correct mere errors of law or fact or just because another view than the one taken by the tribunals or Courts subordinate to it, is a possible view. In other words the jurisdiction has to be very sparingly exercised. (i) High Court's power of superintendence under Article 227 cannot be curtailed by any statute. It has been declared a part of the basic structure of the Constitution by the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of F E'*3 :

-) ;;# $ 0, ! #;;$!0 and therefore abridgement by a Constitutional amendment is also very doubtful. (j) It may be true that a statutory amendment of a rather cognate provision, like Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code by the Civil Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 1999 does not and cannot cut down the ambit of High Court's power under Article 227. At the same time, it must be remembered that such statutory amendment does not correspondingly expand the High Court's jurisdiction of superintendence under Article 227.

(k) The power is discretionary and has to be exercised on equitable principle. In an appropriate case, the power can be exercised suo motu.

(l) On a proper appreciation of the wide and unfettered power of the High Court under Article 227, it transpires that the main object of this Article is to keep strict administrative and judicial control by the High Court on the administration of justice within its territory.

(m) The object of superintendence, both administrative and judicial, is to maintain efficiency, smooth and orderly functioning of the entire machinery of justice in such a way as it does not bring it into any disrepute. The power of interference under this Article is to be kept to the minimum to ensure that the wheel of justice does not come to a halt and the fountain of justice remains pure and unpolluted in order to maintain public confidence in the functioning of the tribunals and Courts subordinate to High Court.

"/ (n) This reserve and exceptional power of judicial intervention is not to be exercised just for grant of relief in individual cases but should be directed for promotion of public confidence in the administration of justice in the larger public interest whereas Article 226 is meant for protection of individual grievance. Therefore, the power under Article 227 may be unfettered but its exercise is subject to high degree of judicial discipline pointed out above.

(o) An improper and a frequent exercise of this power will be counter?productive and will divest this extraordinary power of its strength and vitality.

;

$ # $ $

$$$" & $@

$6 %.

@" & "!7700!"-"3%"< $ @

/ %.

'K $ " & $!"

//0%%-""3$$7"-!0%##$/"E!77!0! %E/ %.

$ $ 6& @

E3"3<

6 $

$ @

-0<#- "!1%"!1%%/0!1!"%!0%$3!-0<

"0 !1%""%!1%%/0%$ $

$ $ $$%/!%$ %.

6K 6 $

F$%#%$"%%"0#%7%004!0

$ $@

6$" & 1

$$ $$ / %.

6 $" & 1

& @

$$/

$" & /%%4 7%$%703!/!777%!"0<!770%"/@

L $ 6

$$ J / %. ' $

$ / %. @ $@

J 6$ $@

/ %K.

$" & --3/

6 $" & @

$ $ 6 $

9 & K $ --)$& $9

K $ $ $

# @

$ $

% &

8 7$

66 $ !6!3,%43D -41")-.@

$ $

$ 0 $=%"C.

6"I 1

--,B-,,) $E !6!3,%43"3 %#%!"3B D )

&+5,'G

-41"!"

&% !6!3,%43=$! 8' 9

!6!3,%43D$!)-. "I 1

# $&

1 K$ $ - - &

2 1- ( & 3 & !!""3!1"%12 &()1)&- - 1 1 2& 39 K

6 $

$$ $

!!;$"I 1

!6!3,%43D$!

&):+ )%1%!0+:8 2

&)5+,' (<) ! " x of the police

# reform is ) ) )

. ') %

and, at the same time, ( /* ' *) ) ' '.

%. A supervisory mechanism without scope for illegal, irregular or mala fide interference with police functions has to be devised. It was earnestly hoped that the Government would examine and publish the report expeditiously so that the process for implementation of various recommendations made therein could start right away. The report, inter alia, noticed the phenomenon of frequent and indiscriminate transfers ordered on political considerations as also other unhealthy influences and pressures brought to bear on police and, inter alia, '' 0- .

) )* 9

'' )) ) :

) 0 The report also recommended the constitution of the Statutory Commission in each State the function of which shall include laying down broad policy guidelines and directions for the performance of preventive task and service?oriented functions by the police and also functioning as a forum of appeal for disposing of representations from any police officer of the rank of Superintendent of Police and above, regarding his being subjected to illegal or irregular orders in the performance of his duties.

$ $8 $ 6 $ (-$ # 1 I

E 12. The commitment, devotion and accountability of the police has to be only to the rule of law. The supervision and control has to be such that it ensures that the police serves the people without any regard, whatsoever, to the status and position of any person while investigating a crime or taking preventive measures. Its approach has to be service oriented, its role has to be defined so that in appropriate cases, where on account of acts of omission and commission of police, the rule of law becomes a casualty, the guilty police officers are brought to book and appropriate action taken without any delay.

6 "I 1

# -B$

! 9 !

% 9 ')% - '. ( . ') 6 .'

' (.9 ) (., H I#;;$0

;;0#$!J *

% ( (* % (

') '

)))) @$

$ %-.

$ $$ ?,4,3-,(2

9$# 1 I 88 9 #

6 "I 1

4(%-.$ !6!3 ,%43D$! "! With the assistance of learned counsel for the parties, we have perused the various reports. In discharge of our constitutional duties and obligations having regard to the aforenoted position, we issue the following directions to the Central Government, State Governments and Union Territories for compliance till framing of the appropriate legislations:

K&&& 0 ' '' +/

(2) The Director General of Police of the State shall be selected by the State Government from amongst the three senior most officers of the Department who have been empanelled for promotion to that rank by the Union Public Service Commission on the basis of their *, *. and &) ) . And, once he has been selected for the job, he should have ' '' of at least two years irrespective of his date of superannuation. The DGP may, however, be relieved of his responsibilities by the State Government acting in consultation with the State Security Commission consequent upon any action taken against him under the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules or following his conviction in a court of law in a criminal offence or in a case of corruption, or if he is otherwise incapacitated from discharging his duties.

X x x 5 @"I 1

=%"C.3!00 / 0$" #1 !14" "3 "3 % 1" ##%$ # "3

# 7!"1"E33!/17!00#71"%/<"3

# ?

the

$ , ?

and ?

for heading the Police Force.

"%0!"""%$"3!"!#".-41"!"

&!%- E#%0/<!%-,"!"C !"%% !6!3,%43=$!)-+2 E3%%##"!7!#E3%$3"3$-F#1#"3 %1"%/0E 8: 76? ''

9"I 1

$=%"C. 5 # $ $$ 9

;1&$9 $"I 1

& 6-,,3 # K

$ "I

& $

(

% ' $ 9 1 $ $ ;1&$ $ $=%"C.= ,*,--,,B'-*-2$-,,2# *+& ", & )

;1&

!#"-%0%2

$$=%-.$"I 1

!6!3 ,%43D$!)-7!+@ =$

$"I 1

6-,,B $

$ 6$ $ $ $

$=%"C. 8; 61 1$ $9 6

# $

--,B-,,) $ $

$=%"C. @

'5 "I 1

& 9 6

$ !6!3 ,%43$! - $

--,B-,,)

$1 2& ( )3 (&(,6 0

66$1 & 6 6 9 '5$

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we pass the following directions:

(a) All the States shall send their proposals in anticipation of the vacancies to the Union Public Service Commission, well in time at least three months prior to the date of retirement of the incumbent on the post of Director General of Police; (b) The Union Public Service Commission shall prepare the panel as per the directions of this Court in the judgment in Prakash Singh‟s case (supra) and intimate to the States; (c) The State shall immediately appoint one of the persons from the panel prepared by the Union Public Service Commission; (d) None of the States shall ever conceive of the idea of appointing any person on the post of Director General of Police on acting basis for there is no concept of acting Director General of Police as per the decision in Prakash Singh's case(supra);

(e) An endeavour has to be made by all concerned to see that the person who was selected and appointed as the Director General of Police continues despite his date of superannuation. However, the extended term beyond the

## date of superannuation should be a reasonable period. We say so as it has been brought to our notice that some of the States have adopted a practice to appoint the Director General of Police on the last date of retirement as a consequence of which the person continues for two years after his date of superannuation. Such a practice will not be in conformity with the spirit of the direction. (f) Our direction No.(c) should be considered by the Union Public Service Commission to mean that the persons are to be empanelled, as far as practicable, from amongst the people within the zone of consideration who have got clear two years of service. Merit and seniority should be given due weightage.

(g) Any legislation/rule framed by any of the States or the Central Government running counter to the direction shall remain in abeyance to the aforesaid extent.

The present directions shall be followed scrupulously by the Union of India and all the States/Union Territories. If any State Government/Union Territory has a grievance with regard to these directions, liberty is granted to them to approach this Court for modification of the instant order.

8& 9 '::'9 C '5$ 61$ # $ $$,4,3-,(2

6 "I 1

'& '

"On an in?depth consideration, we are left with no doubt that the said directions, keeping in mind the spirit in which the Court has proceeded to issue the same, as set out in Paragraph 12 of the judgment in Prakash Singh (supra) (already extracted), are wholesome and if the same are implemented, it will sub?serve public interest until such time that the matter is heard finally. In this regard, we had taken note of the submissions made by Mr. Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Secretary, Union Public Service Commission (U.P.S.C.), who has appeared personally on the request of the Court made yesterday (15.1.2019). Mr. Gupta has stated before the Court that after the judgment was rendered in Prakash Singh (supra), ) (

+/ ( % )(.'' 3 0- ' . 0

'' ) * 3 0- /* ' 0/* ' Mr. Gupta further submitted that subsequent to the directions of this Court, dated 3.07.2018, similar panels have been drawn up for two States and at present, proposals have been received from two more States for the purpose of drawing up such panels.

# ,(*)%(

% *%- ) - 0 #)$ % - ! -%

4 . ' 89 @?(4,4-,(B

6"I 1

& # 1 I 6;1&

"I 1

$ ,4,3-,(2 $

$= 6;1&

6 $1 $

$$ $ $ K @K$? (4,4-,(2 " the recommendation for appointment to the post of Director General of Police by the Union Public Service Commission and preparation of panel should be purely on the basis of merit from officers who have a minimum residual sum of six months i.e. officers who have at least 6 months of service prior to the retirement.

85 995BB,$-,-,$'%&.4(,$(BB) # 1 I % . $"L 1

6 $@

6K 6 $$$

$91$4,6 %-) &8

0. -* 6 $

$$$ 4,6 $ $

!$ $ $=%"C.$ 1$@

@"L 1

(-,)-,-,%K 40 $$-,,3-,-, 6;1&. =$ -,,B

K$1 $@

6K 6$ 4,6 $ -*

#. 6 $ : @@

$ $ < $ 0

$=%"C.$1$ J %.

$$ $

6%5-.

@ $ # 6$# $ $

%5-. %.

&1 23 3&& -1 &)

33&&2 3&%- , %5-. :'

7 $ %. @

$=%"?C.J 4$ < $

=$ -,,B6 6 6 % 52./

6$ # K$ $=%"C.%5B.$ $ 

2"L 1

# 1 I %

$ 6 6 $ /  26

"L 1

,4,3-,(2

# 1 I %

. 6 0

$ 61& 6

#/ : @@

$ =$ -,,B 6$$ $ 6

$ $ "L 1

& 0

$ = %"C. % *,.

% =$ -,,B. *()(-)(4$ $ 6;1& $ @

6 # 1 I $ $ ,5,--,(B :8 @ $ &

* -$ .

%*(. :: @@

J $ $

$ ,5,--,(B 6H & 6

? $

J $=#

# 1 I ?,4,3-,(2

; 9

$=$ -,,B $ 6;1&6 $"I 1

& !6!3,%43D$!)-. ;'

@=$ -,,B

#0 $ 6 "I 1

& 6J #

?$$ $

= %"C. @ =$ -,,B

$ %.

0!- ' $ $ & $

# $$ $ # / %.

0!- $N$

$ $

0!-8

6 A6 I A $K I %.

0!-:$ !$

$$$

K 1 #$&$$@ %.

0!-; $

;1& 6 1 $ $ ?$$J %.

0!-& $ $6

6 6 &

6 $ K %. 0!-9 $

$= %&$$.$ 6 1 @=$ -,,B

6;1& $ $ ! &

'@"I 1

$ #

6 $;1& $ =$ $ 6

;

@$ &

6 E'

17%"%#"317!01"11%"" & $ $ 6 $ $$ $

= %&$$.$1 %.

;1& %.

" 16$9 #$1 16$9 %.

&$16$1 %.

=$$1 %.

?$$$

$ &?

0&C $

6 $9 6$ " $$ @& $

$ & @

$ & 6$& $

$ $ K#%!"% ?$$ 91$ &"/0E"3!6# $170"!"

0!"8 <!#%$ $ $ 6$ " &$$ #$=$$ $# $&$$#

$6 $

6?90" $ # $ $ 6 8 *"3#,0$"%#17!01" %.

1 %.

,-%"!/%0%"<$$$

"3/!%#< 4$!4#F7%$$ $ :

,%L# !0 @

$$$ K

$ $1

#$&$$?

;

7!0"/"""311%% @1 &

$ $H &

$ $6@ $ %.

16 $$$ 6$ %.

$$$ 6 9$ $$$

6 6 $

$ %.

7$$$ !$ $ $ $

= $ 60

$$ $

$ $$ 0$ $

$ $

$6 %.

1 $ # &

$ $$ 6

6 $$$

1 $ $6 $$

$ $ 6 %. &

$ $$ 6

6$&

6 $ $ 6$&

$6 $ $ $&

6 6

6 $ $ O&$ $$

& $ P9$ $&

H $ 6 6$$$ #$ 161 6 $ %. & $6 %K.

@9 6&$ 6 ?90"(50-40)*91%999.= -2,3(B)) &

$-"///<"317!01" 11%"" &'

H & 3!00 !7" %" E 1"3 !

7$- $

6 $ $$ !$ @ #

$$$ $ (, 6 $ $& ?6 $$

6& EH< B#!$3#"37$%4'

<! $

@& # "3!4#F7%$0!"#3!%4"3 70%$#$ $ $$$ $

& @& #

$6$$ K $ 6$$

$ 9 6 &$ 6 1 6 L&

L (,6 6$L&

L 6 F C $$

$=$ -,,B

$ (& ) )2( ( 5- $ C @ $1 &

) $ 6 &

6$?$$ !$ $ $

=%"C.&

6A $K I $ $K 6 J # J

$ H & 6

6$ $$ !$ $ C$ ;8 9=$ -,,B# # $ $ $H &

# $$ $ # $$

# $ & 0 ;1& @ $H & &

($=$ -,,B $$

1 $ #

6$ $& $ $ 6 $1 @ $$$ 6"I

!6!3,%43D$!)-. $$6 K $ + $

$8 @"I 1

$& $ H & # $ = %"C. $ ?(),(-,(B"I

$ ;:

$ ?$$ ! $ $

=%"C.

$ $ &

4$=$ -,,B$E6 I$E $ K F@

$?$$ $ $ 6H & &

)($ =$ -,,B $

6$$$ !$ / ?$$C

" @ $ A6 I $ $ $ &

$ ?$$ $ A $ K I $ $ $ 6

?$$ $ $

$ 76 6H & &

)( =$

6$K 6&

J 11 @

6$ ?$$ $

= %"C. $

1 & 6

6 & $

E $ K F

6$?$$

= %"C.$ $$6

6 $K # K $K

> $H & @

$ &

6 $ E $K F $=%"C.$

1$ 6

6H & & @6!$ $

$=$ -,,B $ # J $ $

6 6 6$=$ -,,B @"I 1

--,B-,,)

# # 1 I

(5- $ & $ 9

6$ $ $=%"C. ;1& ;1&$9# 1 I $ K & # K

$ $=%"C. 9

$ ;1&

6 "I 7 6 " & ' ;1& A=$ -,,BI$ $=%"C. @=$ $"I 1

6-,,B $6 $ %.

& $H & %.

N$ %.

$1$H %.

1!$ %.

6H & %.

$ @ K &

$ $

?$$ $

$=%"C.$ ;1&$ $

@$ -,,B

$ &

$ $$ $ $= %"C. 6 $ $

9?(),(-,(B

6 K& # 1 I $ K

$ $ 6 ;1& --,B-,,) ,4,3-,(2 $ A ,0'1'

0'1'

' $ & " 2'

& 34

" 1 1

5'6 @ ? (4,4-,(B

6 K & # 1 I "I 1

& $ ,4,3-,(2

$= 6 ;1&

6 $ 1 $

$$ $ $ K ? (-,)-,-,

6 K & 9 5BB,$-,-,$# 1 I % . $=$ -,,B 6K 6 $$$ $91$4,6

-*6 $

$$$ 4,6 $ $

!$ $ $=%"C.$1$@

K &

K$1$@

6 6K 6$ 4,6 $ -*6 $ 9 HK ? (-,)-,-,

J @

6 $ $

6 =$ -,,B

6"I 1

--,B-,,)

9 @ =$ -,,B $ 6 "I 1

9 6

9' 9 $$

6"I 1

--,B-,,) (5-

6 ?$$ $

=%"C. !6!3,%43D$!)-. %.

((,(-,,3

6"I

;1&6 %. 9 6

$ 6;1& # 1 I # K

$ $= %"C. %.

6"I 7 6" & '-*-20-,,2'

. -**-0-,,2 $A 6

1 &#6I ;1& #

$=$1$

$ $ ;1&

A=$ $-,,BI6 $ $$6 $ 6 5 $ $$$ $ $=%"C. =$ $"I 1

? @=$ $"I

6;1&6-,,B $

$ $ $ =$ -,,B 6"I 1

? ,4,3-,(2 (),(-,(B(4,4-,(B

$=$ -,,B9 ?(-,)-,-,

6 "I 1

95BB,$-,-,$# 1 I

% . $=$ -,,B 6 K 6 $$$ $91&1$@

$ 4,6 -*6 $ "I

K$1$@

K 6$ 4,6 $ -*6 $

9 # =$ -,,B # 6 6@$

98 7 $

$ 1& 66 98' 9

$=%"C.

6;1& K $ +$

4-,$& $9H & 6 $;1&

$ +

6;1& $

$ "L

;1&

K $ $?$$ $

=%"C.

6"I 1

!6!3,%43D$!)-. (5-$& $ 9

K $

4-,$& $9 98 9

+ 6H &

$ $ 6 $K $

* $ $

J 6 $

6 9 $

6$!$

6 $A $ K I

A& I11

@0?$$ 6 !$

6H &

$A$IA $I$ @ 6 $!$

6 J $E F E F $

@$ * $&

6 6 & $ K # $ $

988 H

$ $

6 $

+ $ 9 6I

6 $

6$ # $$ $ 6 $ @

J $

;1& 6 1 $ $ ,5,--,(B 6$@H & $

6 &

6$?$$ C$1$ $K

$A I

6'I$6

98: @

$ & -,

$ H &

$ #

$& K

# $$=$1$ J

$-, $ & 6& 6

$ 6 J $

$1 $K 6 $

@$K 6

6 6 H & @

*) $ $

98;

$(-?$$ $ 1$ J ;1& $)$$ $ #

= H & (- $$ $ $64$

$=%"C.6

$ $ $&

$L!$ L=$ -,,B

J ?$$ 4,6 $

#$=

. 98& @

*6 #

& & $

$1 & 989 1 1&

$$ 1 & 66 # $ $$ $ H & 1

$ $@

6 $& # $ 6 $ 9 "I 1

%#%!

, !<<! ':+':,89

'8 3/%!!1!0!#%!$"$!/!.-40< "3/!%#%$3!1"#$3!!$"00/< "3"3##%$24%%4!4!04!-$3! AB$!"/"304-"30"3!""3##%$ E! /%! !4!%" "3 7 E3 $3!!$" 00 % ! 9

& $

$E 6F 69?

(5 @= & $ & %#/%!%!004!4!%""3 3!%72%"$!"/7-1"3!"!00"311/# "311%""E/%!4-3!/1!-" /<"37""3E!"E3<"3!1"1! /<"3 %""/!$$7"@" & $ $ $ 6

6=& @

$ 6 '

$ $ @

681& $ '

E*!!6>!0 13! ,%43%B'

;9 ),+: ; 6"L 1

# $

$ $ # $

$$ $ @"L 1

#8I % . E

# $ $ @

$ $ $ $ F 1 6 E,-71 -" $!"

$ $%!"%"3 %#%!B %

.% '&+;

,5 5 "L 1

$ $

& 6

6 6

6 9

E7, -8 9 '7 +

!1 & + $&"')%(2)*.8 (Q725E+'8&

%(B(-.33< 5, ) J $ 6 6 J $ 69 & 6 # 6 #

9$ $ # $ J $6

6 @ $$

. "L 1

I E,"!"# -.!/!%

!0,%433-00! "3B% ''+':,99 E7",%43 ?!30 "3,"!"# -.!/ "3B%

&+'',8;& 9 @

$ '?-((0-,(B $

9 '

1 $ & #6

6$$6

' $

' 6 =$1 $1&

@ $ 6

$ ' 1 & 66 (),(-,(B $ $ 6 # $=%"C.

6;1&0H &

=%"C.D 61 G K$$ 6 & 61 J

6 ,5,--,(B 0 ,3,--,(B #

9 $ ' $$1 $ $ & #

." $?$$ $

=%"C.$1$ @

$ 1& 66 $

1$ 1& 66 $ 6 +

$ $H & =$ -,,B 11 = $ 6H &

$ $

J @ "I 1

& :1& &'&&)7 ;& 2) '8+'',8

E'5 "%""00!E"3!"!7E3$$%-0<"!6 7!"% "37$ # 0$"%$!"2 "3!#"2"- !- ! J-"% "3 1"3 # 0$"% ! %" -"$1 '

# 8 &1 O9 (B*31&5-*P9 & J #

6" & $ $

$ & $@

$ J 6 @

J $ @ &

6 #6 $ & $@

J 6

1 $

54(4- 2B.

E;' 5

& " $ $

& < " =

" &

& $

$,$

9 "

'5 >'

& 9 "

@ &

A $ "

& 0

" ' = 9 " &

& 0 &'

= 9 " @ $

& < & '5

$ '

$ , $ $ $ $

') 91; 6$8 # O%(B3).41&& *2*(B3)1&&%8+1.535P &

# $1& # $J $& '

9? # 1 ## :

1 #O(B2)

1&&-2*(B2)1&&%8+1.)55P< 7

$ K @ 8 1$<+:O%(BB*.41&&52)(BB*1&&%8+1.3(- %(BB*.-B@&),4P$ %1&& 5B4

E>' 5

$ &( "

$ $ $

$'.& &

$ &

$ $

$ & $

$ $ " $ & ' .

, ,' , B ,3>;C

""4;DE3>;C ""-!

CFF &

$&8 =

" $

$ $ $

9 "

') 9 :

11$7O%-,(,.(-1&& *3)%-,((.(1&&%8+1.-*)P &

%1&& *25 ().

E3C'7 $ 9 " ,

,$ &$ 3>G ,

' & A

$ '

, @

9 " 44C"

& "

9 "

& &

$ ') @$ # :

O%-,((.(1&& (*,%-,((.(1&&%8+1.-(P %1&& (*)

-5.

E4F'7

$ $

$ ,$

,$ $

$ $ ,$ ( .

& ( . $

.. $ $

' , $ $

,$ <

$ &$ &

,$ & ( .

& ( . '

$ <

& $ & & $ ,

$ $ @

') :

9 $

6 #

$ $ #

J 6 67$ # 1 < = 7$"

& 6 6

5 7

--,B-,,)

6"I 1

1 I

"3!#"-%0%

%-/<

,"!%0%4"37$-!1!0%"<#0$"% #7!0#!77%"1"! )

+%"77"!%0!"% #"3%$"%%-% !6!3,%43D$!)- !%"!0 $!"/!%"3!""371%%/%0%"<#!7"%4%"E7$-/<

, C 17!01" 11%"" % /0$6 % "3 $"F" # "3 0$"%""37"# )

+3#%%44%/<"3%/-!0 %"3%4!!!E!/<06%4!%4%41!"%!0 %$$/<E!<#!%-#%0/<,"!"C !"%2 !%$"%7!"3%/<"3D/0,-71-"%

!6!3,%43D$!#1"%1""%1

&&& (7 (- 2&<1- 111 3& 1- 1

-- 189 => '3 ) & '-1 %&'

(&!- &# (7& &- ( ) ?

9 --,B-,,)

6 "I 1

$ $ ?$$ $

$=%"C.$ ;1& $ $

@ $ =$ -,,B $ 6;1& $ #$ $ $ ! &

@ ;1&

5- ! $E1 F

$ H & $ $

$$$ @A $K I

$ 6H & 6

J $1 A (7! @;1&(),4-,-,%&'

.0 5)(2 $ -,-,.

$ H & $-

6$$$ $

$ $= %"C.1@"I 1

# 1 I --,B-,,)4(%-.

J $ $K

& (& >9

$& $K &

$ $ ?$$ $

@1$

&'(),2$-,-,-(,(-,-,

6 6$$$ $ 0 ;1&$

$ ?$$

J E( 5- ,@

6 $$$ $ $ (B,(-,(B-(,(-,(B@ $

.$$$ $ * $ ;1& -,,B

;1& 9 E

)$91?$$ $

-% .

4$91%$

-,,3 $ $

@ $ $&

*$ =$ -,,B$?$$ $ & #

$?$$ 6

$A& I 6 6

@ H &

)($=$ -,,B$

E $K F& # 6

9 1 $ H & A $K I & $

$ $& $ $& $ $ $ & $ K &

;

' $$ $

$ 1 & 66 & 6

/ & 6 $$ 9?),0(BB0-,(B$ 6

$ 6 J ?,3,--,(B $$

J $ =#

$ $

3 &-1 2& <1- 1 11 @

6 & 6H &

& 9

1 $ & $ $

& 6 9

$ $ $

$ 6 H & ?

6 "L 1

!6!3,%43D$!)-. $

6 + 6

$ $

$(- $

9 $

$H & ,5,--,(B 6

/ $ 6"L 1

!6!3,%43D$!)-. 6$&

$ J $ ,5,--,(B

H & $

$ & $$

$ $9

$ $ 6

$& $ $

$ $ & $ $ $ @

$ $ $

$?$$ !$ $ $ = %"C. $ 1 $ J 6$? $ $ H & $

$H & &$16 =&$$ $ ?$$ $

6 6

$$$

$ ,5,--,(B $=%"C.$1$ J 6$$ 6

1 8#1& $;1& J

=$ -,,B6

6 1%H .& $ @

J 6

$$ $

& $ $

$H & E3%$33!%"3/70! 7/-"3!/!%!!!4-1"E%"3-"!</!% #-!"%@

$ ;1& H & # $$ $ 0$$$

# $&

# 6

$01 & 66 @$

$ $ $"I 1

E % -/0%$,%$ 11%%-*,!"3%<! %<!!"3F ) '5+';,9 & ) !! + "

" ,

'@"I & $

" & &

" &2

') 9* + )7@ %

9+'','

'9(*."I 1

& @ 0 "&

&, $

"+ '5555557 0 "

&0 "

$ 5) EA & 11 &)*',)

5+ ,''

"I 1

4,E7

" ,

& '5) 1 $

$"I 1

E*')=B8),%'

55+

/# , : E8 -7 & ' %)C'&4,%'

+', ; "I 1

6 #

$ $ $ "3% %E # "3 1!""2 E !E "3 J-"% !$$%40<2 "3!" "3 0%$%4 ! $3 /< "3 F7"

17!01" 11%"" # %43 !6%4 ##%$ #1 %##"

7!"1" ! 4!%L!"% 1" # E31 ! !7" % 0%$ 1%%"!"%"!"3 ##%$"3M!4#F7%$D# 17!01"#!77%"1"! )

+$!"/!%"/% $"!"%#"3/!$%"%!#!1"% (& ) D )2(D( 5- ) 0!%/<"3 D/0,-71-"% !6!3,%43D$!)-7!+!"3% 4-2%"3%"!"$!20$"%#"3 0%$%4!/<"3 !%17!01"11%""$!"/!%"/%004!0 # $#$ *% #$ #($(*- ,( ( = ! 9 $$

4 $ $

$ @

=$ -,,B$ $

$& $

$$ $ J

= %"C.

6 #!$#$ 0L ?L>M3+::9FA?H:?:29,,?AL>,8?

?2 9?F2?,9+ 0?F?,:L N ,8?

0?F?,:L7?2 9?F2?,L22:,,?? " $ $

/ $

$ 6 010H & 8 ' 9!07!"/!!3/,0-6,*!3!.!%'

,8 ;

%(- 4,B4(,. A(-R $ $

$1& !"$-"%% "30!"%1%"#"3$!%!"(3"3!$!%!" %#%"#!7!"%$-0!7""3!"/$%/<"3 -0< $"%"-" ,0$"% 11%"" E3%$3 3! "3 F7"%"3-/.$"@

K R ; 6 & @ & $K

$ $

6 " &

K , 9 !%!"3"# )

+5 ,8 ; "I 1

5, ;

"4 $! # !770<%4 "3 (/-<$"% "3!1!0!#% @

= & $

$ 7 %#"3!1"% %"3 7 " / 1!0! #% % #- /! %!1%%/0 %0!" %%4%#%$!" ! "%%!0 1!"%!0!%#!!""%"-#%4%4"4%%4E%43" ""37%"%!7$"#=$!%"40<%70!<2 %#"3%#$ !E!-$3"3!" !!/0

/. 7$!!$3-$3$$0-%2 $ 6 $

--)$& $ 5( ' K 6$ K

6= & K K

$ 6 6 '

6 $ $ 3.-%$%!07E1!%/-"%"-%"%$"" ! ! F$7"%!0 %"-!"% ( ! 1!6%4 "3 1!6"3!"$-"%/-!01!<"N/<J-"%4 "3%$!!!!<7$"N%"#E%"3!1" #1%"%<$!-"!%/-!0$!%"3%" !!7700!"!-"3%"%-/"%"-""3%E%E" "3%E#7!"1"!0 1"%11%"" - %"#$ /< "3 $-" %/-!0 E%00 -0" % 7!!0<%4$11!"%#7!"1"!011%"" !71"%@ 6 @"I 1

0 61&

$ $

$ $ 6 $K @K K $ $

// $ $

6 '

$ @"I 1

$K $

$ K 69 =$ -,,B 6;1&*&

H & $ $ 0 6H &

$$$ $ $

=%"C.$1$ C 6-,(B E!"%!0"%"-"#*"!0!0"3!-,$%$ ? ?!0<!! !1!B'

,-77 ) + , :5' "I

K L $ 6$9 $

%1&& 52-. @ $ $ 1 & 69

6 '

$ $ $ $

J 6

$& J

1 & "3 ,0$"% 11%""%-04!0/0%4!"%"$!% -77" # %" $%% # 0$"%4 $!%!" % 7#$"!"3"37%$%70#!"-!0.-"%$ "J-%!!1%%"!"%!-"3%"<!,0$"% 11%"" ! F!1% " $ ! # "3 0$"% 0$"%#! 7%"3!/$# "!"-"<J-%1"

/0 ? 1& $ $$ 0 "I

49 +'83* + %'

;+8 ,858 $$

K $

J 1& 017 66

0 66 6 @K$ 42B '5 RRRRR 0"3-0J-%2"3,0$"% 11%"" C ,0$"% ! % " /0%4 " $ ! E3< "3< ! " 0$"%4 ! 7!"%$-0! 7 !CE3<"3<!0$"%4!7!"%$-0!72!"3 $!1!</9$

# $$

$ 9 J 6 $ $

&$$ 61$$ # % -/0%$,%$11%%%!<!0!02)' 55+ , : "I 1

$ 1& $ $ 91&$

6 69 1%

6 .

(B**

J $ $ $

@"I

1& @"I 1

93 -5*"I &

$9 @ K @

1& $

( @

$ $$

6 $1 & $

9 $ @

@ 1 &

$ 6 @ $

K$ K $ 7 @

# 1& $

6 $$$ 1&

$ J 6 $

& 1=

;$9O(B2)1

1&&)(3P

& $9 1 %

6 .

(B** 9 1 %

6 .

(B**

6 $ @ $ $ 1 &

6 1& 0HK J 6

$ $ $

$ $ 6 J 8 8 *H & 11 &

5+ ,''

4, A4, '$ 3E"3%/-!0$!%"!! 7700!"-"3%"<"$!00#"37!0$! $"%"-",0$"%11%"""-"!6"3%F$% @ @

$1&

6 3! " 4% $%" " "3 ,0$"% 11%"" # 1!6%4"3%!1"!%"%"-/.$""!77!0 !6%4"3!00%E# #"3$!%!"21!< /30"/<4!!"31!</30"/ 4#"3%"<7#%"#$%71%"""3%"E-0 %"-!00<!1-""3!""3%/-!0!"3%43-" 3!"!"%""%4!,0$"%11%""!$"!! 7700!"-"3%"<"30$"%9 6 6 6

$ ?

$ & 1=

O(B2)1

1&&)(3 %(B23.-@&)-2P -2 $

%1&&

)424B.

A -2R9 $

$$ 6-""3!""

.-"%#<7-17"%4!%4!/%"!<F$%#

0 7E@ 6 $ $

$ 9

3 ,0$"%11%""%$"%"-"/<3%43 !6%4 7%/0##%$7%/<3!%1!! 11/ # "3 % -/0%$ ,%$ 11%% 3%!"30"3!""3<E-0"!$"% #!%!%17!"%!01!%1!6%40$"% @ $ 1 &

61 $$ 6 $ &

@ &

61 $$$ $

@ 1& &

J # K K

6$$$ 9 $

6 (37E% "%3%43!-"3%"<"3%!7-17"%"3!" "3!1E-0/F$%%!!!/01! ! %# "3 0$"% % 1! F"!- $%!"%2%!/%"!<1!"3$-"3! !1707E""%6E"3!1!"3!"%! !J-!"!#4-!!4!%""3!/%"!<F$%# 7E, @"L 1

6$ $

@"L 1

6K $ $ 6 #

6 $+ 6$ 6

K $ K

6K $ 8 : 9

,*,!"3%<! %<!% '5+';,9 & $'9 3,0$"%11%""$%"#F7"%"3 #%0"%7%/<"33!%1!!*1/#

,!%-0<7"/<"3##%$#"3"!0 1"!"3,"!"1"E33!F7"% %"31!""-$%7%%2E3!%43

>0 11%""!F7"/< 3! $%"3 1%"#!$3#"3$!%!"2!"34!%4! $%"3%$!#71"%2%"%"7" !"3%43-""%""3!1"1!/<"3 ,0$"%11%""!!!7700!"!-"3%"<@J

6 #

6 61& 1 # 1 & 1 & K $ 6$

$ $

9 $ $ $

$1& $ @J

0" $$ 6 K 61& @ 6 $

'5 (!$$%-#"3#!$""3!""3F7"/<= 7%%1!<"!$$7"!$%!00$%$-1"!$ !3$%"1!<"/77"!<"3!""3F7" /<= 7%% % " -/.$" " .-%$%!0 %E % !00 $%$-1"!$ 9 $ 1& 07$

6 6

$$ $

$8E

6F @ $

6$ $$$ 6;1&1&

K 6 $ 6 K

K &$ $ J

$ $91@1 & $ $ #

J ;1&9

$ $ HK & $ K $$

& L $ @ $ $

$K @ S $

6S$ 9 $

6@ 6

0# '

1& 6

$ 61

$ 1 & 6

$ 6 &$ 6

& ;1&: O;1&: %-,,*.(, 1&&(*-,,*1&&%8+1.342P

FE 6FEFE;$F

1& @ $

$ 61 &$

1& 1

$1&

$ $ 1 7 $$ $ 1 &

*%5. J

$6 $$ 1 L 9 $ 6$

6 $

1& ;1& @ & 6

$1& K $ $

$ 6 @

K $1& # $

@ 1 & 6 6 $

K $/

$ K 11& 6;1&

6K $

6"I

%#%!, !<<!2) ':+':,89 2%

!!':@

$''

9 " & --) $ & $ 9

6=&9$

6 =&

6=& 6 "

& --)$&

# =&$

" &

$ $ 6 '

@ $=9

$$$ @

61&

$ 9

$$ !$ " &

$" & $ !$ $$ '8 3/%!!1!0!#%!$"$!/!.-4 0<"3/!%#%$@

6$$

EF $$

4 H

& $

$E 6F

0. 69?

@= &

$ & %# /%! % !004 !4!%""33!%72%"$!"/7-1"3!"!00"3 11/#"311%""E/%!4-3! /1!-"/<"37""3E!"E3<"3 !1"1!/<"3 %""/!$$7"3 %43-"#!%0""%$"3!#!%#!$"!E40< %$!"3!1"1!/<"3 , @

" &

61&

6 $ 9$ E %#%!, !<<!B %-.

$ =9& $ & %

& .

$ C *,!"3%<! %<!$!)-.

$ $K

+K 6 $

$ $ J

$10H & $

J $

=& $ + 6

6 6 #

8 ;

,? !.!%!3%

;+'

,'; B% -,-(. 6"I 1

ABR@ & $ $$

$ $6 8 6

# A I

A IA6 IA IA $I 1 & @ $

$ 6 1 &

& 6

$ 61 /-"2# 4!2"3,0$"%11%""$!0%"E $0!%#%$!"%E3%$31!</!"!%!$E%"3"34!!"% 4%%"3 @

$6(BB4(BB5,-$3$0!%#%$!"%% E%"3%"374!"%#"3,0$"%11%""! !/$2"3-43%"%%!/0"3!"%! $! # 4!!"% !" !%!$ E%"3 "3!" # "3 ,"!" 1"2%"E-0/%!/0"$! 7 $$ $1&

*%5. J $

$6 $$ 1 L

) 9 % # %! ? !-0!2 %

9+ '' , '

(* A(* @

$ 6

=& 6

1!<1!6%"E!1"

$ &

=& J #

$ $ $

/<!7"%4"3!1"!!2<!"%$6 ! 1 9 6

$ $

$ $ (3 3! 7$%!#!%2%17!"%!0!!!/01!2/< !770<%4"3!1<!"%$6!1"!00$!%!" !"3%!/%"!%%"37$#!1"/< 2 "3 $-" E%00 " %"# % 179 6 O1796 %(B23.51&&52)(B23 1&& %8+1. 5)5P ;1& "6 = O;1& "6=%(B22.-1&&-5-(B221&&%8+1.525P 71$@O71$@%-,,,.2 1&&4B*-,,(1&&%8+1.(4P. 3$-1-0!"%!%4#"3!#"!"""00!E"3 %-#.-%$%!0%E/<"3%/-!0C-"%$!#0$"%/<! 0$"%$11%""2%"3!""3$-"$!"%"%!77!0!4!%""3 !1"/<"30$"%$11%""!

"3%!0%1%"$7# %"# 0< % $! E3 ! "4 $! # !770<%4 "3 (/-<$"%$!#1!0!#%%1!-" 4!%4"3 /%!/<#"311/2%"3!/30"3!""3!004!"%#/%! !4!%"11/%#"!6!"%"#!$!0-E%00"%170<"3!" "3"%$11%""$%"%4#"33%4300##%$CF7"%!00 $00$"%0</%!!4!%""3!44%7"3!770%$!"%# (/-< 7%$%70 ! %"#$ 4- # 1!0!

$!-"%"/F$%%F$7"%!0!$!/%41!-"# -$3%"#$ )8+)/+ ( > O , ( > H( ,> )

P 8: '

=$ -,,B$ ;1& 9

%-.

9 # 1 I %

.=$ -,,B $ 6;1& 6 $ $

6 6

6"I 1

6 6$

(5-$& $9 8; @ H & $ $=%"C.$1$ < 6-,(B 3 $=$ -,,B@ $H &

6$$$ $

$ C1$ 6;1& !##%!%"!"'&

$&' 5)(2$-,-, &

6$$$

$ $ 6

$ K $ $

# $@

# 6 $ &

1 0'# 1 $ @ $

1 $ $ $

1 0'# 1

@ $ $

J $

@ & $ # $ K

$$ 6 6$ $$(),4-,-,

# 6 # $$ $ 6$" $$

%" 16 .$&6C

6 6$ & 6& 0 $;1& HK?$$1

=&$16$1 &

# $ $

$ $ 8& @ 6H & # *()(-)(4$

$;1&0H & ,4,*-,(B

$ 5)53$

?(3,(-,-,

6 6# 1 I $K $ H & /

6 "I 1

& E

, *

,!"3%<! %<!B) '5+';,9 & (3 -,$ 4-5 9

$ $ @

*()(-)(4$& $$ 6# 1 I

89 @

& * 0 &

$ K $ $6 $H $$$ $

=%"C.

)( $ =$ -,,B !! ; !! 5 $

85 @ $

6 @

!# 1 I $

0H J $"I

6 ?(4,4-,(B

6"I 1

$ 9 @;1& "I 1

6 (4,4-,(B $$ ,4,3-,(2 $

$=%"C.

6 $ @$

?(3,(-,-, 6

HJ $ $

$$ #

$ $=%"C.

6 # $$

$$ $

J $

# 6 #

$"I 1

3$ A % -/0%$,%$11%%%!<!0!0 B2)'

55+ , : 2 4-- 6 $ $$

J $ @

$ "I 1

$%!<!0!0)-. $

$ $@

)4$

< (3,(-,-, J $

$ 9 J $ 0 $$ H &

" %!<!0!0D $! %-. A!"%!0 "%"-" # *"!0 !0"3!-,$%$??!0<!! !1!B'

,-77) + ,:5'*!.!0 ,E! %#%!%'

;+8 ,858

4-- :

$$ $ $!$

#$=0=C 0

= %"C. 6

# 6 ;1&

H & @$$ $#$=0= 4,6 $

6 $)

0 $A $K I

6 $

"$C$ 1@@

6K 6 $?$$ $ 6

$ $K C 1

$ $?$$ $ J 6 ;1&0 H & 6

$$ $ K C & J $1

?$$

J @

$ @

# #

C 6K # J $ K 6 $

$$ 6 & @ $

6H & +

6H & $ $&

)($=$ -,,B 6

6 6

6 # $$ $ $$ ! @ $ $$ $

=%"C.

6 H & 9 $ H & 6 $

$1& 66

@ @

? (3,(-,-,?$$ $ $ $

6 $K 6 # $ :' @@

?(3,(-,-, ,5,--,(B

$ =#

= %"C. 6 ?

,3,--,(B9 $

6 $ $

& J &

)( $ =$ -,,B@

?$$ K 6H & J $ @

$ 1 & 66 $K

K 6@

)4$

(3,(-,-, 6;1&$

< $"I 1

# 1 I $ $ $$

: @@

)( $=$ -,,B $ $

# 1 I % . *,$(3,(-,-, *( )(- )(4 $ & $$ $ ;1& 0 H & $ @

6 6"I 1

9 6

611 81 $=%"C.

$1$ &

)($=$ -,,B

)(

=$ -,,B

$ # 1 I % .'

11 1 $

)(.=$ -,,B

6 $ =$ -,,B $ 6 9

:8 9

6;1&01$ ? (),(-,(B

6"I 1

9$ 1 $ ? ,4,3-,(2 $

H & $;1& "I 1

$ $=%"C. 7

(3,(-,-,

$ ?(),(-,(B @

?(3,(-,(B C $ $

?(3,(-,(B$

? (),(-,(B $$ 6# ? $ 6 $ 0

6H & =$ -,,B'$?(),(-,(B

/ $

(3,(-,-,@

$ @

+ :: @

6;1& 6"I

6 $ $ $ $?

6 @ $ 6;1&

$ A

I $H &

$$$ $

=%"C.@;1& $ $$(),4-,-,$$

$;1& 0

$(-$$ H & $ $ 6 $K $" C

$K $ $$ (,6 "I 1

6 #

$ $ $

0 @ ;1& 6 $$ $ ?$$ $

$ $ 6

?(3,(-,-,@;1&

1 $ $

$$ (),4-,-,

6K -,--$&'5)(2$ -,-, $$;1&9 $ $

$ $ $

6 "I 1

6# $ K $K 6

$H &

$ @

$ & :; @

;1& #

4,B$& $9(B*, $

K $ ?$$ $

= %"C.

$"I 1

(5- $& $9--,B-,,)(),(-,(B ? # 1 I % .?

$!$ ?--,3-,-,

6 & ;1& $ $$ 6 - $ =$

-,,B

6$=@

$ 6 :& 9 $

$ $

$=6 $ "I 1

,4,3-,(2(),(-,(B

3-"3%/-!03!F$%".-%%$"%4!%4 .-%$%!0%E#"30$"%7$/<"!4%4%"3F7" 1!%-7%17%4%"E7%%!%!4!%""3""00!E "3-/.$"%$-%"37$%4 !!4!73!"3%- 8)/+%!E%"3"1 -:

:9 C

)'+) ++ )8+

- ):+ $ @

=$ -,,B 6;1&0H & $ $=%"C.$1$ < 6C 6 -,(B $ !6!3 ,%43D .-41" %

. @ 6 ;1& 0 H & $ $H & ,5,--,(B J ?,3,--,(B 61$ "/!0%!04!0@@

K $ 6

$ $ 0 $1& 3-2

( '& 5 #

E%6! -7"!

"!0 1%%"!"%%/-!0!"3F/ ( '&'9 #

E%6! -7"!

"!0 1%%"!"%%/-!0!"3F/ ( '&;'#

E,"!"# -.!/

"!0 1%%"!"%%/-!0!"3F/ ( '&& #

E,"!"# -.!/

"!0 1%%"!"%%/-!0!"3F/ ( :&'&#

% -/0%$,%$11%%

*3*-"!#!!"3/ ( :&'5#

% -/0%$,%$11%%

,%!"33!""7!3<!<!2 !!00E J 6J $ ;1& 0 H & $ $ & ,5,--,(B J ? ,3,--,(B 6 1 $ ! " !% K

(3,--,-,

( 85''#

,%!"33!""7!3<!<!

,"!" # -.!/ !"3 % %1%

<$ $ :5 7$

!$ &

-$=$ -,,B

$ $$ $

6 $=%"$ C.

6 $ $ $

?$$ 6

!6!3,%43=$! #

6 $ !$

$K#

$ $

$=$ -,,B

6 "L 1

6 $ $ $"L 1

!!6!3,%43= $! J ;1&

6 $ $6$ #

$ "L 1

),(,+ ), ?,+ 1/ &"32

6 &&-% (E F &&:- F