New Delhi/Bhubaneswar: The Supreme Court continued hearing the high-profile case involving the appointment of the Odisha Director General of Police (DGP).
The focus of the day’s hearing was on the Odisha government’s revised list of eligible IPS officers and Susanta Kumar Nath’s integrity certificate.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana was hearing a petition against Nath’s exclusion from the list of officers being considered for appointment as DGP following the communication from CBI.
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Odisha Advocate General Pitambar Acharya defended the state government’s actions.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended the inclusion of officers promoted from Level-15 to Level-16, arguing that UPSC guidelines allow a wider pool based on suitability, not merely seniority.
The bench posed two critical questions to the state: Why was it necessary to create an ex-cadre post, and why did the state add extra names when three eligible cadre IPS officers had already been recommended by the UPSC, in adherence to the Prakash Singh guidelines?
Justice Joymalya Bagchi questioned whether available Level-16 officers should first be considered under Clause 2A before including Level-15 officers. The Bench also questioned the basis for withholding Nath’s integrity certificate, noting that the CBI material did not show him as an accused in an FIR.
Responding to the queries, the Solicitor General argued that the decision was made to ensure a larger pool of eligible candidates, maintaining that the state government followed both Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) parameters and Prakash Singh guidelines.
The Supreme Court’s core scrutiny centred on whether these transparency guidelines were strictly observed, and whether the UPSC properly reviewed and monitored the selection process.
As per standard protocol, state governments forward the names of eligible cadre IPS officers to the UPSC. The commission reviews the credentials and recommends a panel of three senior-most, qualified officers to the state for the DGP post.
