Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.

com)

1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURIDICITON
[Under Article 32 of the Constitution Of India]
WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. OF 2018
IN THE MATTER OF:

1. DR. CHANDRAPAL,
S/O Sri Beni Ram,
R/O B-505 Kamla Nagar
Agra Uttar Pradesh-282004
……Petitioner
VERSUS
1. UNION OF INDIA,
Through The Secretary,
Department of Personnel and Training,
Government of India,
North Block, Central Secretariat,
NEW DELHI.

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION PETITION UNDER

ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

To

THE HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA

AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE
HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

THE HUMBLE PETITION ON BEHLAF

OF THE PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH :

1. That the present Writ Petition as Public Interest

Litigation is being filed by the Petitioner under

Article 32 of the Constitution of India for the

enforcement of Fundamental Right guaranteed under

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

2
Article's 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India

seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus or any other

appropriate writ, order or direction to the

Respondent No. 1 to quash the impugned notification

dated 10.06.2018. That the petitioner Shri. Chandrapal (A

Retired Secretary to Government of India Ministry of Micro,

Small & Medium Enterprises) has been constrained to file the

present writ petition under Article 32 of Constitution of India

to uphold the institutional integrity & independence of

bureaucracy. The present petition raises important questions

of constitutional importance, which goes to the roots of

fearless functioning and the independence of our executive.

1A. The petitioner has not approached the concerned

authorities in the present matter.

2. PROFILE OF THE PETITIONER :

That the Petitioner is a citizen of India and a retired

Civil Servant (IAS) and has ser ved as Former IAS

Retired Secretary Government of India Ministry of

Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises . The present

petitioner is actuated by considerations of bona fide

public interest and the impugned notification being

ultra vires the Constitution is filing the present Writ

Petition as public interest litigation.

That the present petition raises important questions of

constitutional importance, which goes to the roots of fearless

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

3
functioning and the independence of our executive. Petitioner

being the member of this highly respected fraternity files this

petition to keep the integrity of the institution and to reaffirm

the belief that such posts which require special knowledge

and experience can’t be given based on certain prerequisite

which is contrary to the selection procedure already in place.

T h at t h e p e t it i on i s m a d e b o n a fi d e a n d i n th e

i nt e re s t of j u st i c e.

3. PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENTS :

1. Respondent No. 1 is the Union of India, Department

of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Home Affairs .

The Respondent is ‘state’ for the purposes of Article 12 of the

Constitution and public authorities against whom a Petition

under Article 32 is maintainable.

4. QUESTIONS OF LAW :-

A. WHETHER the impugned notification dated

10.06.2018 is ultra vires the Constitutio n and

particularly against Articles 14, 15, 16, 19 and 21 ?

B. WHETHER an appointment to the cadre of Civi l

Service can be made without recommendation by the

Union Pub lic Service Commission?

C. WHETHER the Union Government can make

appointment to the Superior level of Civil Service

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

4
without following the due process for making such

appointments?

D. WHETHER the Department of Personne l and Training

being Cadre Contro lling Authority of the Civil Service

can assume the ro le of the recruiter, which it has

never done in the past and has processed all

recruitments through Union Pub lic Service

Commission or Staff Selection Commission?

5. THE FACTS LEADING TO THE INSTANT PETITION

ARE AS UNDER:

1. That the present writ petition under Article 32 of the

Constitution of India has been filed before this Hon’ble

Supreme Court by the way of Public Interest Litigation against

2. The present petition raises important questions of

constitutional importance, which goes to the roots of fearless

functioning and the independence of our executive.

3. That the petitioner is aggrieved by the shocking manner in

which the central government through circular issued by the

Department of Personnel & Training invited talented individual

including from private sector, with the expertise in the area of

Revenue, Financial Services, Economic Affairs, Commerce and

Civil Aviation, Agriculture, Co-operation and Farmer Welfare,

Road transport and Highways, Shipping, Environment, Forest

and Climate Change, New and Renewable Energy, at the level

of Joint Secretary. A true copy of the notification dated nil

issued by the Government of India, Department of Personnel

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

5
and Training for lateral recruitment to senior positions in

Government of India is hereby marked and annexed as

Annexure-P/1 [Pages 13 to 14 ]

4. The contract will be for three years from the date of

commencement of service, extendable up to five years

depending on performance. The Joint Secretary posts are for

the senior management in the Government, who are

instrumental in policy making and Implementation of Programs

and Schemes of Government of India. The selection into such a

high position with Government of India should have been done

through Union Public Service Commission, a constitutional

institution specifically set up for this purpose.

5. This Lateral entry will bypass the three stages of UPSC Civil

Services Exam Preliminary, Main Exam, and Interview and also

the present arrangement in which 1/3 rd of the vacancies in

Indian civil Services is filled by promotion of eligible

candidates working in different states services.

6. That the selection into such a high position with Government of

India should have been done through Union Public Service

Commission, a constitutional institution specifically set up for

this purpose.

7. That the candidates from corporate or private sectors are likely

to lack the understanding of India’s ground realities, which the

experience and training process provides through its various

attachments and programs. There is a danger that business

houses may use the opportunity to push in their own men.

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

6
The issue of conflict of interest when it comes to entrants from

the private sectors.

8. That if private sector people allowed working with government

then there will be disturbed balance & inequitable sharing of

benefits and discontent among the govt. personnel.

9. That the private companies motive is profit making. And the

person coming in the government sector will also try to profit

the private companies. And will work discreetly for corporate

under the garb of government office.

10. The advantage with the current civil service is that policy

makers have long-term interests in government. They also

have a tradition of fairness and stake in the government.

Private sector individuals brought on contract of three or five

years may serve someone else’s interest as they would have

no long-term stake in the government.

11. It will hurt the current set of bureaucrats who have to report

to these lateral appointees and which is opposite of the

continuity that is there in Indian civil services system.

12. That the officers who had come up through UPSC recruitment

spend their professional lives in postings at grass root levels of

administration rising rationally through the seat rules. These

officers bring to table their unmatched expertise on governance

and its issues by the time they became joint secretaries to the

central government. That the All India services were designed

in a way that by the time an officer completed 20 yrs. He/She

would have worked in various layers of the administration to

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

7
have a thorough understanding of what was needed in policy

making at the higher levels. This is very crucial & this

experience is irreplaceable.

13. That the recruitment and service rules for such posts is not

clearly defined and neither a credible statutory agency like

Union Public Service Commission or any autonomous agency is

given with the responsibility of recruitment. Which makes this

selection process arbitrary and unreasonable.

14. That in the view of the above-mentioned facts and

circumstances, the Petitioner is constrained to approach this

Hon’ble Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India on

the following grounds among others.

6. Manner in which the petitioner would be

affected:

The Petitioner is a public spirited citizen of

India and retired civil servant . Through the

newspaper reporting he came to know about the

impugned notification and is concerned about the

manner in which the bureaucracy can be politicized

through it. Petitioner fights for the cause of public

justice and is seeking the interference of this Hon' ble

court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India

That the Petitioner has not filed any such or similar

Petition before this Hon'ble Court or any other court.

8. GROUNDS:-
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

8
A. BECAUSE there is no rational or any objective except to benefit

the select few in the garb of selection. There is no mention of

the selection process which is extremely arbitrary. The real

intention appears to intake following a particular ideology

matching that of the current ruling establishment. The

notification is thus clearly violative of Article 14, 19 & 21 of the

constitution.

B. BECAUSE the lateral policy notification makes the choice of a

lateral entrant arbitrary. Anyone who is close to the incumbent

government will get the position, making it difficult for

bureaucrats who came through UPSC.

C. BECAUSE That the selection criteria of joint secretary are

arbitrary as notification do not specify about any criteria. Hence

it is violative Article 14 of Constitution of India. Hon’ble court in

case of State of Rajasthan vs. Sevanivatra Karamchari

Hitkari Samiti court held that the wisdom in a policy decision

of the Government, as such is not justifiable as such policy

decision is wholly capricious, arbitrary and whimsical thereby

offending the Rule of law as enshrined in Article 14 of the

Constitution.

D. BECAUSE this Hon’ble Court in State of Madhya Pradesh &

Ors. vs. Mala Banerjee (2015) 7 SCC 698, court held that, “in

violation of constitutional provisions, or is arbitrary or irrational,

same may be stuck down by court in exercise of power under

judicial review. In the present case selection criteria to appoint

joint secretary is based on mere experience, which can be

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

9
selected only through interview. No established norm is being

defined by the government.

E. BECAUSE the due process of law, both substantive and

procedural is part and parcel of Indian Constitutional Law and

without adhering to it, any executive or legislative act is ultra

vires to the Constitution and deserves to be stuck down.

F. BECAUSE the move in all its likelihood will lead to politicization of

bureaucracy. As, the selection of the secretary would be on the

discretion of government no autonomy can be maintained.

G. BECAUSE the proposal of lateral entry at senior decision-making

levels will increase the disconnect between policymaking &

implementation.

H. BECAUSE the lateral entry would open gates for spoils system,

driving talented people away from a civil service career.

I. BECAUSE the selection process is not manifestly political neutral.

That such new selection process will adversely impact the

constitutional mandate for affirmative action. That this move will

bypass the reservation policy in place of government job.

J. BECAUSE this process of government is arbitrary which will lead

to favoritism, and thus compromising the accountability and

transparency of Government.

K. BECAUSE there is likelihood of the potential loss of internal

talent as well as the likelihood of atrophy of the existing career-

based services.

L. THAT other grounds shall be raised at the time of

hearing of the present petition.

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

10
9. The Petitioner herewith has not preferred any other similar

petition either before this Hon’ble Court or any other Court

below seeking identical relief.

PRAYER
It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble

Court may b e pleased to:

a) Issue an appropriate writ declaring the impugned

notification dated nil issued by the Government of India,

Department of Personnel and Training for lateral recruitment

to senior positions in Government of India as

unconstitutional; and/or .

b) Pass such other or further order/s as this Hon’ble

Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and

circumstances of this case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONER

AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY

DRAWN BY: FILED BY

SUDHANSHU CHANDRA
ADVOCATE

Drawn on: 29.06.2018

Filed on: 03.07.2018 [NIRMAL KUMAR AMBASTHA]
New Delhi ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER