Orders in Dogra case today

Challenging the extension in service, three Additional Director Generals of Police, Jarnail Singh Chahal, Sarabjit Singh and Mehal Singh Bhullar had earlier stated that extension in service granted to Dogra was 8220;contrary to law and could not be sustained8221;.

Claiming the taking away of powers to grant extension by an amendment in the 1958 rules, the counsel for the petitioner had added that the action was without jurisdiction. The Union of India, the Secretary to the Government of India and the State Department of Home Affairs could not grant extension to an All India Service Officer, he had added.

Further claiming the lack of necessity to grant an extension to Dogra, the counsel had stated that Union of India had earlier acknowledged the availability of officers having requisite experience in the State. Moreover, the action was in violation of the principles of natural justice, he had further added.

The CAT, in their judgment delivered on December 26 last year, had concluded that the petitioners may lose their promotion to the DGP8217;s post if the extension was granted. The Tribunal had also recorded that the petitioners, contenders for the post after the DGP8217;s retirement, would suffer irreparable loss and injury in case Dogra continued in service, the counsel had stated.