The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside a 2019 Central government order that had rejected his VRS plea, calling the refusal a case of ‘non-application of mind’
NEW DELHI — The rules for voluntary retirement from service (VRS) are straightforward: a government servant can seek VRS after 20 years of qualifying service, or at age 50 for Group A and B officers. It takes a three-month written notice and clearance from vigilance and disciplinary authorities.
But for Maharashtra-cadre IPS officer Abdur Rahman, 53, availing that right meant a nearly seven-year legal and administrative battle — and three separate VRS applications.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside a 2019 Central government order that had rejected his VRS plea, calling the refusal a case of “non-application of mind”. The court directed the Union Home Ministry to re-examine Rahman’s notice afresh within three months.
“No government should force an unwilling officer to continue working,” Rahman said. “Even when I moved applications stating that I did not wish to continue, the state kept manufacturing small issues to drag the matter,” media reports quoted him as saying on Thursday.
https://www.instagram.com/p/DZHOew5MWpB/?igsh=MTE3OTF6OXZpanNwaw==
Years of roadblocks
Rahman, a 1997-batch officer and IIT-Kanpur civil engineering graduate, first applied for VRS in 2017 after being overlooked for promotion to Special Inspector General of Police. He later withdrew the plea to pursue the promotion matter before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT).
His second application was rejected in March 2018 by the Union Home Ministry for lack of vigilance clearance. The reason: disciplinary proceedings dating back to 2007 over a delay in providing RTI information during his tenure as Yavatmal SP. Rahman said the information had been sent twice by post and the lapse was clerical. He alleged a ‘major penalty chargesheet’ in November 2015 was “manufactured” to block his 2017 promotion.
Those RTI-related proceedings were eventually closed, and he was promoted in 2019.
The third time: Maharashtra cleared his VRS in October 2019, noting that no chargesheet had been issued in any pending complaint and “no major penalty will be imposed on the Officer.” But, nine days later, the Centre blocked it again, citing disciplinary proceedings — this time over alleged service rule violations in a family matter, and a March 2019 speech at the launch of his book Denial and Deprivation: Indian Muslims after the Sachar Committee and Rangnath Mishra Commission Reports.
In December 2019, after Parliament passed the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), Rahman publicly announced his decision to quit, calling the CAA “against the basic features of the Constitution.” He participated in anti-CAA protests. That led to a third chargesheet in April 2022 for unauthorised absence, publishing VRS-related information on social media, and protesting the CAA.
Rahman challenged the VRS denial before CAT, which dismissed his plea in December 2023, citing pending complaints. The Bombay High Court upheld that in July 2024, ruling the Centre had final authority on VRS for IPS officers.
He then moved the Supreme Court. The apex court noted that when the Centre rejected his 2019 VRS plea, no formal chargesheet existed — meaning no disciplinary proceedings were actually pending. Of the three complaints cited, only one was validly under contemplation, and the Centre had not properly weighed Maharashtra’s view that it was unlikely to attract a major penalty.
While affirming that VRS approval for IPS officers rests with the Centre, the court ordered a fresh review within three months.
A Career in Service, a Fight to Exit
Rahman has held key posts across Maharashtra: ASP Latur, SP Dhule, Additional Commissioner of Police (Administration) Pune City, and IG in the Maharashtra State Human Rights Commission.
He briefly considered politics before the 2024 Lok Sabha elections but stepped back. “It was my anti-CAA statements that made me a target,” he said.
Rahman says he does not regret his actions and plans to work on issues concerning Muslims and other marginalised communities. “Life was comfortable in service, but at times you realise you can do far more for people outside the system.”
He added: “I am happy with the Supreme Court verdict asking the government to reconsider my VRS application. I would have been happier had the court directly granted me VRS. I will rejoice only once my VRS is formally approved.”
