Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040011412024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/382/2024 Rajendra Prasad Son of Shri Moti Lal, Chief Head Quarter Project Brahmank, Pasighat, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS The Union of India and 3 Ors through the Cabinet Secretary, Govt of India, Rashtrapati Bhawan, New Delhi 110004 2:The Secretary Age: 0 Occupation : Ministry of Defence Govt of India 101 A South Block New Delhi 110001 3:The Secretary Age: 0 Occupation : Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions Department of Personnel and Training North Block New Delhi 110001 4:The Direcotr General Age: 0 Occupation : Border Roads Seema Sadak Bhawan Ring Road Page No.# 2/5 Naraina Delhi Cantt 10 New Delhi 11000 Advocate for the Petitioner : Khoda Tari, Bengia Tayu Advocate for the Respondent : Marto Kato, DSGI BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE O R D E R Date : 26.06 .2025. Heard Mr. K. Tari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. Kato, learned DSGI, for the respondents. 2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner essentially, has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to carry out the cadre review of Border Road Engineering Services (Civil), an organised Group 'A' Service of General Reserve Engineer Force (GREF), as per the guidelines of Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India, by following the model cadre structure with retrospective effect. 3. The petitioner, on being duly selected through Union Public Service Commission, was appointed as Assistant Executive Engineer on 24.03.1993 and presently working as Superintending Engineer (Civil)/Director Estimating Project Brahmak at Pashighat in the East Siang District of Arunachal Pradesh, claims to be aggrieved of the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities to carry out the mandatory cadre review after a interval of every five (5) years, as per Page No.# 3/5 the letter of the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India dated 06.05.1972. 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that even after expiry of nine (9) years, no cadre review of the Border Road Engineering Services (Civil) has been undertaken, as the second and the last cadre review of the said services was held in the year 2015. 5. Mr. K. Tari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was duly selected by the UPSC and joined the service as Assistant Executive Engineer on 24.03.1993 and now holding the post of Superintending Engineer. He submits that had the cadre review been carried out at the regular interval of five years, as required to be done as per the provisions of law, the petitioner would have been promoted to the higher pay scale of Chief Engineer, as the petitioner has been provided Non-Functional Upgradation equivalent to the pay scale of Chief Engineer w.e.f. 01.01.2022, vide order dated 11.05.2024, although he is entitled to be provided from 2013. Therefore, the respondent authorities may be directed to complete the cadre review process. 6. Mr. K. Tari, learned counsel, having submitted above, however, submits that since the respondent authorities appears to have initiated the cadre review process, as per the stand taken in their affidavit-in-opposition, the process which has already been initiated, may be directed to be completed with a specific time. 7. Mr. M. Kato, learned DSGI representing the respondents, submits that all the posts of Border Road Organisation are sanctioned by a high level Committee Page No.# 4/5 of various Ministers known as Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), in which the Hon’ble Prime Minister, Hon’ble Defence Minister, Hon’ble Home Minister, Hon’ble Finance Minister and the Hon’ble Minister of External Affairs are members. The posts of Army and the General Reserve Engineering Force (GREF) Officers and their distribution are clearly defined. The post in both the Army and the GREF are allotted based on Manning Policy of the Government of India, vide orders in 1981, 1990, 1991 and 2010. He submits that although the cadre review has already been initiated and is under active consideration, in view of the involvement of various Ministers in the committee, it would not be possible to complete the process within a given time frame. However, he submits that the authorities would certainly undertake the process within a reasonable time, in accordance with the rule. 8. Considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. 9. The respondent authorities have filed their affidavit, which reflects that for the ongoing cadre review, a Board of Officers (in short ‘the BOO’) under the Chairmanship of the Chief Engineer (Civil) level officer of BRES Civil cadre was constituted at HQ, DGBR. Accordingly, a draft Cadre Review proposal was prepared by the BOO. The draft board proceedings were also circulated to the members of BRES Cadre for comments ensuring complete transparency. The Draft Cadre Review proposal was thereafter submitted to MoD (BR) on 18.10.2022, duly incorporating all inputs. A high-level committee under the Chairmanship of AS & DG (Acq), Ministry of Defence, has been constituted by the Ministry vide order dated 28.12.2023. The ADG level officer of BRES (Civil) Cadre is also the member of the Committee constituted by the MoD. Meeting of Page No.# 5/5 the Committee was held on 09.04.2025, under the chairmanship of AD & DG (Acq) to discuss the proposed Cadre Review of Border Roads Engineering Service. Various issues pertaining to the BRES Cadre Review were deliberated during the meeting. The Committee recommended that there is a requirement to examine and analyze various Road Construction Organizations like NHAI and NHIDCL, which are executing works on EPC mode. Accordingly, BOO chaired by the Chief Engineer level Officer of BRES (Civil) Cadre has been constituted for the same. The BOO is under process and report will be submitted during next meeting of the Committee for consideration, by the members. 10. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the stand of the respondent authorities, as noted above, I am of the considered view that no issue remains to be adjudicated upon, as the respondent authorities have already initiated the cadre review of the Border Road Engineering Services (Civil) and is under active consideration. 11. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to complete the cadre review process expeditiously, as the cadre review appears to have not been done since 2015. It is needless to observed that on the completion of the cadre review, the petitioner would be entitled to service benefit(s), as per relevant norms/Rules. 12. Writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant