Special leave granted in all these matter s.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

The dispute between the direct recruits and the Emergency

Commissioned Officers (ECOs) in the Central Reserve Poli ce

Force (CRPF) over the question of seniority has been goi ng

on for a long time. The Delhi High Court has, ultimatel y,

held in favour of the ECOs and by the impugned judgment, t he

High Court has directed the implementation of its decisi on

regarding seniority and grant of consequential benefits to

the ECOs.

As per the judgment of the High Court, the 37 dire ct

recruits, who are now holding the posts of Commandants, th at

is to say, 22 as Commandants (Selection Grade) and 15 as

Commandants (NonSelection Grade), by virtue of the upgrad a-

tion of 88 posts of Commandants (Non-Selection Grade), wi ll

have to be reverted. The direct recruits feel aggrieved by

the impugned judgment of the High Court and it is contend ed

on their behalf that as they were not parties in the co n-

tempt proceedings in which the impugned judgment of the Hi gh

Court has been passed, it is not binding on them, and th at

the matter should be remanded to the High Court so as to

give them an opportunity of being heard. If these conte n-

tions of the direct recruits are accepted, there will be

further delay.

It may be mentioned that this is the second time th at

the matter has come to this Court. It is the desire of t he

parties that the dispute should be amicably settled an d,

pursuant to that desire, the parties including the Union of

India had, from time to time, given their respective sugge s-

tions regarding the terms of settlement. Unfortunately, t he

suggestions or the proposed terms of settlement were n ot

accepted by one party or the other. The terms that we re

suggested by the Union of India were not acceptable to t he

ECOs and those of the ECOs were not acceptable to the dire ct

recruits.

It is gratifying to state that at the last heating, bo th

the direct recruits and the ECOs came with an agreed ter ms

of settlement. The hearing was adjourned so as to enable t he

Union of India to consider the terms of settlement as agre ed

to by the direct recruits and the ECOs.

Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, the learned Counsel appearing on

behalf of the Union of India, states that although the Uni on

of India is also of the view that the dispute between t he

parties should be resolved amicably, yet the said agre ed

terms of settlement were not acceptable to it and it has, in

lieu of the same made two alternative suggestions for se t-

tlement. Copies of the alternative suggestions have be en

produced before us by Mr. Subramaniam. Neither of the alte r-

na-

tive suggestions is, however, acceptable to the ECOs.

We have considered the respective terms of settlement as

put forward by the parties including the said two altern a-

tive suggestions. CRPF is a sensitive police force and the re

should not be any dispute and differences among the membe rs

of such force. It is the duty of the Government to mainta in

peace and harmony in the force by trying to resolve a ny

dispute among the members of the force in public interest.

After considering the facts and circumstances of t he

case including the impugned judgment of the High Court a nd

the terms of settlement, as agreed to by the direct recrui ts

and the ECOs, and also the alternative suggestions of t he

Union of India, we are of the view that the terms of settl e-

ment, as agreed to by the direct recruits and the ECO s,

appear to be fair and reasonable and do not involve a ny

additional financial liability of the Union of India f or

placing the 35 ECOs in the posts of Commandants (Selecti on

Grade) with effect from the date they were promoted as

Commandants (Non-Selection Grade), as provided in the agre ed

terms of settlement. On an examination of the two altern a-

tive suggestions made on behalf of the Union of India, we

are of the view that they do not redress the grievances of

the ECOs. In our opinion, while it may be desirable that t he

present position of the direct recruits should be protecte d,

the giving of such protection should not be to the prejudi ce

of the ECOs.

In the circumstances, in order to establish peace a nd

amity between the contending parties and for ends of ju s-

tice, we direct that, in modification of the impugned jud g-

ment of the High Court, the appeals be disposed of in a c-

cordance with the terms of settlement, as agreed to by t he

direct recruits and the ECOs, as follows:

1. The Union of India shall withdraw the order viz. ord er

No. F.2/1O/86-Estt (CRPF) PP IV dated 18.6.1986 with immed i-

ate effect. The order providing for upgradation of 88 pos ts

of Assistant Commandant (2^nd in-command) to the post of

Commandants (Non-Selection Grade) shall thus stand rescin d-

ed. The D.P.C. 1986 and all consequential orders regardi ng

promotion against upgraded posts shall also stand revoked.

2. To protect the 37 direct recruits who were holdi ng

posts of Commandants, the Union of India shall create

supernumerary posts of Commandants (22 as Commandant Selec –

tion Grade and 15 as Commandant Non-Selection Grade), whi ch

shall be held by the 37 direct recruits who were holding t he

said posts on the date of judgment dated 2.9.1985 passed by

the High Court of Delhi.

3. The vacancies of 13 posts occurring in the year 19

of Commandant (Non-Selection Grade) shall be filled afre sh

by means of a D.P.C. The D.P.C. shall make promotions in

accordance with rules and shall operate upon the revis ed

seniority list prepared by the Department pursuant to t he

judgment of the High Court dated 2.9.1985 affirmed by th is

Court on 21.1.1986.

4. The subsequent vacancies in the years 1987 and 19

for the posts of Commandants (Non-Selection Grade) shall be

filled in accordance with rules and the promotions shall be

made through D.P.C. in accordance with law/Rules.

5. The Union of India shall review the D.P.C. of 1985 f or

the posts of Commandants and such review shall be complet ed

as early as possible.

6. Further, 35 ECOs who have already been promoted as

Commandant (Non-Selection Grade) till today will hold t he

posts of Commandant (Selection Grade), from the date th ey

were promoted as Commandant (Non-Selection Grade) with t he

condition that they will not be paid any salary for the po st

of Commandant (Selection Grade) till their turn comes f or

promotion to Commandant (Selection Grade) against regul ar

vacancies, as per the seniority list.

Each party to bear his/its own costs.

Y.L. Appeals di s-

posed of.