DoPT asks state to decide as per inter-cadre transfer rules

The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) has asked Haryana Chief Secretary TVSN Prasad to decide the case of inter-se-seniority of the 1990-batch IAS officers considering Rule 6 of the IAS (Regulation of Seniority), Rules, 1987, which deals with fixation of seniority of officers transferred to another cadre.

Earlier, without deciding the matter, Haryana had sent the case of seniority of six IAS officers to the DoPT on August 6. Now, in a letter, dated August 21, the Under Secretary, DoPT, Kavita Chauhan, told the Chief Secretary (CS) that the gradation “list is prepared by the state government every year in accordance with Rule 5 read with Rule 6 of the IAS (Regulation of Seniority), Rules, 1987”.

Due to the present tussle over seniority in the 1990 batch, the post of Financial Commissioner Revenue (FCR) in Haryana, which usually goes to the senior most IAS officer after the CS, has been kept vacant. Also, Chief Secretary TVSN Prasad is retiring on October 31, so any change in the seniority list could impact the selection of the next CS too as he or she is likely to be selected from the 1990 batch.

The issue has arisen as three IAS officers of the 1990 batch — Ankur Gupta, Anurag Rastogi and Raja Sekhar Vundru — have challenged the present gradation list, claiming that Sudhir Rajpal and Sumita Misra, who at present are placed above them, should be placed below them as they have been transferred from Himachal Pradesh (HP) and Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) cadres, respectively to Haryana.

Their letter, dated March 1, and then another one, dated March 22, to the Chief Secretary mentioned that as per Rule 6 (3) of the Indian Administrative Service (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1987, “If an officer is transferred from one cadre to another at his request, he shall be assigned a position in the gradation list of the cadre to which he is transferred below all officers of his category borne on that cadre who have the same year of allotment”.

In response, Rajpal had submitted on May 9 that the CAT judgment, dated December 16, 1993, in his case showed that he was to be allotted the Haryana cadre, which was his home state given his application to Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) within 10 days of publication of the final merit list. In compliance with the judgment, he was allotted the Haryana cadre, he had added.

Misra, in her response dated June 3, had said that the case of Gupta, Rastogi and Vundru rested on the claim that she was transferred from some other cadre to Haryana on her request, and therefore Rule 6(3) applied. She pointed out that in the Provisional Cadre Allocation Order (November 1990), she was allotted Haryana state ab initio, which was subsequently confirmed in the Final Cadre Allocation Order (December 1991). “Therefore, the question of cadre change or transfer does not arise…,” she had added.