While passing strictures on the state government, the Divisional Bench comprising of Chief Justice R P Sethi and K R Prasad Rao directed the state to make fresh appointment by constituting a committee as per the earlier 1995 Government Order, after considering the cases of all eligible DGs, including Dinakar and T Srinivasulu.

The court observed that the appointment was made without proper application of rules and mind and apparently the said decision was arrived in a casual manner, which could not be sustained when it admittedly affected the right of the petitioner.

The court made certain remarks about the way Srinivasulu was appointed as DG&IGP and noted that the appointment was made against the rules and it had forefeited the opportunity for the petitioner for a promotion. If themistake was not rectified, it would be disregard to the Constitution.

The court further noted that the appointment of police chief could not be left to the vagaries of political leaders, who have brief tenures. Such arbitrary appointment, disregarding the seniormost IPS officer in the state with proven merit, integrity and ability will not only demoralise him, but also demoralise the entire police force.

The court also compared the Academic Carrier Records (ACRs) of both Dinakar and Srinivasulu, prepared by Deputy Secretary, DPAR. Both's ACRs had mentioned as `outstanding' for three years and `very good' for two years. When the merits proved equal, the Court noted that next priority should have been given for seniority.

Holding that status was important to a Government servant, the Bench quoted from Supreme Court judgment in Tulsiram Patel's case and said that the senior IPS officer was transferred when the matter was under litigation as Chairman and Managing Director, which post was subordinate to theDG&IGP. A senior officer should not have been made to work under his junior.

However, the court declined to go into the details of allegations made by Dinakar on Chief Minister J H Patel. The court has directed the Government to award Rs 10,000 as cost to Dinakar.

Earlier, Dinakar had approached the CAT against appointment of Srinivasulu, stating that the state had violated norms and superseded his seniority. The appointment was not of good intention, Dinakar had stated.

Dinakar had also made allegations against the chief minister of targeting him, after he had named Patel in NGEF's Torpedo kickback scandal. However, on March 6, 1997, the CAT had dismissed the appeal.

Dinakar filed a writ in the High Court, challenging the order of the CAT.