Senior Mumbai cop’s ‘boss’ misled panel to deny promotion: Tribunal

MUMBAI: Five years after he challenged his non-inclusion in a 2010 list for promotion, onetime DCP of Mumbai traffic police

Harish Baijal

who was later sidelined has a reason to smile. The

Central Administrative Tribunal

(CAT) held there was “clearly an attempt to mislead the selection committee” against Baijal.

The tribunal directed the state and Centre to hold a review selection committee meeting and consider Baijal for promotion as a 2010 select list candidate. Baijal, 56, a 1993 batch direct recruit from

MPSC

, had been superseded by 70 officers by the time he was promoted to

Indian Police Service

(IPS) cadre in October 2014.

The tribunal held while Baijal was in Mumbai, his ‘reporting officer’ had “flagrantly abused” the objectivity rule in writing Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) and “ante-dated” two of them. Holding the action “grave mala fide,” the CAT said, “Two of his ACRs for 2005 to 2007 are clearly written as an abuse of the process and in flagrant violation of government instruction and can only be held to be non est (not existent).”

It directed the Centre and state to “call for an explanation of officer concerned and decide on disciplinary action and on need to make suitable observation on his service record.” Baijal had challenged the selection process in CAT. The tribunal also held that actions of then additional chief secretary (home) in not communicating Baijal’s ACRs suggested he had been “acting mala fide.” It directed the state to pay Baijal a “nominal penalty” of Rs 2,000 for each of five ACRs not communicated.

“Considering the manner in which the home department handled Baijal’s case and the grave damage in his morale and career by their behaviour,” the bench of RVijaykumar and Arvind Rohee held it “necessary” that the state must also pay Baijal his entire legal costs. Baijal’s counsel Ravi Shetty pointed out that Baijal’s reporting officer was then joint police commissioner (traffic). He said Baijal was “wrongly and inappropriately” deprived of promotion.