Removal of Director General of Police (DGP) by a state within a few months of appointment is not a violation of the orders of the Supreme Court.
This may come as a surprise to many, but the evictions are as per the Supreme Court order that they were not working and violating service rules. In some cases, to get a graceful exit from the state, top officials quietly go on leave and take a different route.
A case in point: Punjab, which has seen three DGPs during the tenure set by the Supreme Court due to political instability.
Last week VK Bharva also went on leave for two months. The first officer to be the scapegoat of the political rivalry was the current National Investigation Agency (NIA) chief Dinkar Gupta, who went on leave after Charanjit Singh Channi became CM.
The officer who replaced Gupta – Iqbal Preet Singh Sahota – was also dropped and Siddharth Chattopadhyay was given temporary charge of the Punjab Police. But before his retirement, a full time DGP VK Bhavra was selected with due process. Within a few months, he too has gone on leave like Gupta, making the situation the same again. All this within a period of 18 months. Now Gaurav Yadav is the new ‘caretaker’ DGP of Punjab Police.
Punjab is not the only state from where the DGP has been removed. Recently, the UP government also removed the DGP saying that he is “neglecting government work and not taking interest in departmental duties”.
In such cases the tenure of the DGP is not fixed.
Similarly, in Chhattisgarh, Ashok Juneja has been made DGP after removing DM Awasthi. Even after a lapse of seven months, the state police is yet to get a UPSC-approved DGP, while Juneja continues to serve as the acting DGP.
Not only the states, Delhi, which is a union territory, also had a temporary police commissioner for about 11 months – SN Srivastava, before Rakesh Asthana was given additional charge as CP Delhi just before his retirement.
expert
According to former Uttar Pradesh DGP Prakash Singh, who moved the court for a fixed tenure for the DGP, two years is the mandatory period, but with conditions.
“The duration is fixed, but that doesn’t mean you can do whatever you want. If there are any serious charges against the officer, or the state finds any violation of the rules, the officer can be removed. But again the state will have to follow the process of re-appointing the DGP through the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). There have been some cases where states have tried to divert the route by issuing orders, amendments etc., but they have been set aside and clarified by the SC,” Singh told News18.
A former DGP said that states prefer DGPs with temporary charge. “There have been cases where officers were either asked to go on leave or were removed without any reason other than changing the guard. Later, states delayed the process of sending names to UPSC, claiming that the officer had gone on leave, hence officially a DGP. They are happy with the DGP having a temporary charge as it is easier for them to line up. Meanwhile, after a few months, the officer who is on leave is taken out of the state on deputation or retires and the government also delays the process of appointment of a full-time DGP for a period of nearly a year. The DGP told News18 on condition of anonymity.
According to another DGP rank officer, various top officials do not raise their voice even after facing harassment.
“I get calls and requests from various top officials challenging the appointments, as they claim they are in service and cannot do so. Even when they feel that some illegality has happened, they prefer to remain silent and continue their services to get a peaceful retirement. Somebody has to fight if they want the system to change, but few are ready to do so,” said a former DGP of a state.
What does the order of the Supreme Court say?
The state DGP will be selected by the state government from among the three senior most officers of the department who have been empaneled by UPSC for promotion to that rank on the basis of their length of service, very good record and extent of experience. Leading the police force.
Once selected for the job, they should have a tenure of at least two years irrespective of their date of retirement.
catch
Part of the Supreme Court order, which has been used by states to remove a DGP, is that a DGP can be relieved of his responsibilities if the top officer is incapable of discharging his duties and is unable to perform any service. In case of violation of rules.
In Uttar Pradesh, Mukul Goel was removed from the post of DGP for “neglecting government work and not taking interest in departmental duties”. Similarly, Punjab DGP Iqbal Preet Singh Sahota and Siddharth Chattopadhyay were also removed on the same grounds on different occasions.
The court order stated: “However, the DGP may be relieved of his responsibilities by the State Government in consultation with the State Security Commission, consequent to any action taken against him under all India To perform his sentence in a court of law in the Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules or in a criminal offense or in a case of corruption, or if he is otherwise incapable of discharging his duties.
one more obstacle
According to a SC order, an officer with a service tenure of six months or less cannot be named in the DGP panel. According to various top officials, in some cases, states delay the process to ensure that some officers have six months left to retire, making them ineligible for empanelment.
States request UPSC to allow a cut-off date of their choice to make certain officers eligible for the post of DGP.
The Punjab government insisted in 2021 that the cut-off date should be September 5, so that Siddharth Chattopadhyay, apart from Dinkar Gupta and VK Bhavra, could become eligible.
read all breaking news, today’s fresh newswatch top videos And live TV Here.