The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal filed by an Indian Police Service (IPS) officer seeking a change of cadre from Tamil Nadu to Rajasthan, ruling that cadre allocations cannot remain open to revision decades after selection. The court stressed the need for certainty in service allocation, noting that allowing such changes could disrupt the entire selection system.
Background of the Case
The case revolved around IPS officer Rupesh Kumar Meena, who was selected through the Civil Services Examination in 2004 under the Scheduled Tribe category and was allotted the Tamil Nadu cadre. Dissatisfied with his allocation, he later sought placement in the Rajasthan cadre against what he claimed was an unfilled “insider vacancy.”
Read also:- Supreme Court Sets Aside J&K High Court Order in NRI Custody Fight, Sends Case Back for Fresh Decision
The dispute traces back to events involving another officer, Rishikesh Meena, who had qualified for the IPS in 2003 and was allotted the West Bengal cadre. He reappeared in the 2004 examination and again secured selection but declined to join, including rejecting an insider vacancy in Rajasthan.
The next candidate in the merit list, Rajesh Kumar, claimed the Rajasthan insider vacancy. Although the Central Administrative Tribunal initially ruled in his favour, the Union of India challenged that decision before the Delhi High Court. During the pendency of litigation, Rajesh Kumar qualified for the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) and opted for it, making his claim for the IPS Rajasthan cadre irrelevant.
Rupesh Kumar Meena, who stood third in the merit list for the insider vacancy, then approached the Tribunal in 2010 seeking the Rajasthan posting. His application was dismissed by the Tribunal and later upheld by the Delhi High Court, leading him to appeal before the Supreme Court.
Read also:- Supreme Court Sets Aside Madras HC Order, Says High Courts Can’t Strike Off Plaint When CPC Remedy Exists
Arguments by the Appellant
The appellant argued that the Rajasthan insider vacancy remained unfilled because the two candidates senior to him did not join. He maintained that his request was not a fresh cadre change but merely a correction of allocation based on merit.
His counsel told the court that the vacancy effectively existed and that there had been examples in the past where similar adjustments were made even after some delay. The appellant also contended that he raised his claim promptly after it became clear that Rajesh Kumar would not occupy the Rajasthan post.
Stand of the Union of India
The Union of India opposed the appeal, arguing that cadre allocation becomes final once a candidate is assigned a cadre. It submitted that the vacancy was deemed filled once it was offered to a selected candidate, regardless of whether the candidate later declined to join.
The government warned that allowing such claims years later would create a chain reaction across services. It argued that shifting one officer from Tamil Nadu to Rajasthan would open a vacancy in Tamil Nadu, potentially leading to multiple revision claims by other officers.
Court’s Observations
The bench, comprising Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar, noted that the appellant had been serving in the Tamil Nadu cadre for more than two decades and had raised his claim six years after the 2004 selection process.
The court pointed out that the appellant was not the immediate next candidate eligible for the vacancy when the first candidate declined it. His claim arose only after the second candidate also did not take the post.
“The process of allocation or change of cadres cannot be allowed to remain fluid for all times to come,” the bench observed, cautioning that reopening such matters would unsettle settled service arrangements.
The court also noted that no evidence was produced to show that the Rajasthan insider vacancy remained unfilled for over 20 years.
Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court held that finality must be attached to cadre allocation and found no illegality in the government’s decision to retain the appellant in the Tamil Nadu cadre.
Finding no merit in the appeals, the bench dismissed them along with any pending applications.
Case Title: Rupesh Kumar Meena vs Union of India & Others
Case No.: Civil Appeal Nos. 11302-11303 of 2016
Decision Date: February 4, 2026
