CAT dismisses petition challenging Gaurav Yadav’s posting as Punjab DGP

But in March 2022 when the Bhagwant Mann-led AAP government took charge, he (Bhawra) was “pressurised to relinquish the charge and it was perceived that he was an appointee of the previous government”, the application of Bhawra stated.

Bhawra also submitted before the CAT that as the Punjab government was putting pressure on him and threatening him with disciplinary action, he requested for 60 days leave in July 2022. The leave was sanctioned, and Gaurav Yadav was given additional charge of the post of the DGP to head the police force.

Meanwhile, at the CAT, along with his original application (OA), a miscellaneous application was also filed by Bhawra seeking condonation of delay of 55 days in filing the OA. In the miscellaneous application, Bhawra submitted that he approached his counsel in the second week of October 2023 after arranging the relevant documents. The limitation period had expired as most of the documents and orders were not in the public domain and it took time to arrange the same, and secondly, the respondent (Punjab government) kept falsely assuring him that he would be posted as DGP (HoPF) and was intimated that the orders dated September 2, 2022, are in for reconsideration.

Bhawra’s counsel argued that there was no delay as the applicant has a recurring cause of action as his appointment as DGP (HoPF) had to continue for a period of two years in view of the Punjab Police Act, 2007, as well as the directions in Prakash Singh and Others versus Union of India and others.

In reply, the counsel for the central government submitted that the averments made by Bhawra that he had approached his counsel in the second week of October 2023 after arranging the relevant documents are vague, and as there is no explanation, the OA is liable to be dismissed.

The Tribunal bench of Rashmi Saxena Sahni (Member – Administrative) and Ramesh Singh Thakur (Member-Judicial), on hearing the matter and perusing the replies filed by the Punjab government and DGP Gaurav Yadav, held that “actually, there is delay of 1 year and 114 days which remains unexplained by the applicant. Thus, the present application is a motivated application, filed at the fag end of the career…the application for condonation of delay makes it evident that the same has been preferred with the casual approach”.

The Tribunal held that the reason assigned in the application was that the applicant (Bhawra) allegedly approached his counsel in the second week of October 2023 which was after the limitation period expired and the delay was on the pretext of arranging the relevant documents which were not in public domain, whereas the respondents (Union, Punjab, and DGP Gaurav Yadav) specifically submitted that the documents attached with the original application were orders/judgments passed by the apex court which were available on the website of the apex court and were thus in public domain.

“So, such excuses cannot be considered as proper explanations for not approaching the Tribunal within the limitation period,” said the Tribunal.

“Moreover, the applicant possesses the qualification of LLB and LLM and being a legally trained mind, he has proceeded in a casual manner,” the Tribunal observed, while dismissing the application for condonation of delay and the original application challenging DGP Gaurav Yadav’s appointment as Head of Police Force (HoPF), Punjab.