In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has confirmed the reinstatement of Gurjinder Pal Singh, a former Additional Director General of Police in Chhattisgarh, who was earlier subjected to compulsory retirement amid allegations of corruption, extortion, and sedition. The court’s decision supports an earlier verdict by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) that overturned the retirement order dated July 20, 2023, and directed Singh’s reinstatement with all consequential benefits.
A bench led by Justice Suresh Kumar Kait rejected the challenge posed by the Centre against CAT’s decision, which had been in favor of the 1994-batch Indian Police Service (IPS) officer. The Centre had contended that the retirement was justified based on public interest and aligned with service rules. It also argued that CAT had overstepped by evaluating evidence linked to criminal complaints, the downgrading of Singh’s annual performance appraisal report (APAR), and various disciplinary proceedings.
However, the bench, which also included Justice Girish Kathpalia, found these grounds insufficient. “The petitioners have not shown anything adverse in the service record of respondent no.1 (Singh). The allegations, based primarily on statements from Mani Bhushan, an SBI officer, do not substantiate a strong enough basis to warrant Singh’s compulsory retirement,” the court noted.
The judgment highlighted that while three FIRs against Singh were stayed by the Chhattisgarh High Court, the decision to retire him compulsorily was made prematurely, without awaiting the outcomes of these proceedings or the conclusion of departmental actions. “This approach of compulsory retirement was adopted as a shortcut, which is not justifiable,” the court observed.
Furthermore, the court criticized the delay in the departmental proceedings against Singh, noting that even after three years, an “enquiry officer” had not been appointed. It also condemned the reopening of a previously closed case of alleged abetment of suicide against Singh, calling it “an apparent attempt to harass.”
In related submissions to the Supreme Court, Singh claimed that the Chhattisgarh government was using its machinery to harass him and tarnish his reputation because he refused to grant “illegal favors” to high-ranking state officials and resisted efforts to falsely implicate members of the previous government in the so-called Nagrik Apurti Nigam (NAN) “scam.”
