New DelhiThe Modi administration seems to be tightening its grip on how state governments recruit and promote Indian Police Service (IPS) officers. In its third such move within the last eight months, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has now made it mandatory for states to seek the approval of the central government before promoting or appointing any senior Indian Police Service (IPS) officer. , otherwise there is a risk of having the posting cancelled.
While several serving and retired officials told ThePrint that this was an “overreach”, “interference” and “violation of federal rights”, others argued that the intervention of the home ministry was necessary as some states have reportedly not been able to inform the Centre. took advantage of the previous practice. Government only after the appointment of officers on senior posts
Former Director General of Police (DGP) and President N. “There appears to be a justification for bringing such orders for better cadre management, although all such directions of the Center are at risk of being misused,” Ramachandran said. India Police Foundation (IPF), a policing and law enforcement think-tank.
“States are equally guilty of inviting such central intervention. There were disappointing records of creating unfair positions and promoting officers out of turn. Some posts were made to bribe some officers, while some were made to stand inconvenient officers,” he said.
The latest MHA directive, seen by ThePrint, was sent to all chief secretaries of states on September 12. It said it is mandatory for state governments to obtain approval from the central government before promoting or appointing any IPS officer to “selection grade” – which means from the rank of superintendent of police (SP) and above. The MHA’s message further stated that many states “regularly appoint IPS officers on promotion to higher grades” without approval.
read also, ‘Chief Justice Calling’: How Bihar IPS Officer ‘Cheated’ DGP In Withdrawing Liquor Case?
Story of 2 orders and 1 offer
The letter dated 12 September from the Ministry of Home Affairs points to Section 3(2) IPS (Pay) Rules 2016which stipulates that appointments to the selection grade and above level shall be “subject to the availability of vacancies in these grades and for this purpose, it shall be mandatory for State cadres or joint cadre officers, as the case may be, to Obtain prior concurrence of the Central Government on the number of vacancies available in each grade.”
The rule states that any such “appointment made without the prior concurrence of the Government of India shall be liable to be cancelled”.
The MHA, in its letter, further wrote that the states are “providing insufficient inputs making it difficult to process such proposals” (officers being considered for appointments/promotions). It also pointed out that “some states do not respond to queries on the matter and thus, resolutions are delayed”.
State governments have been asked to send proposals for promotions and appointments to the Home Ministry for approval by November 15, along with details about the officers under consideration.
Earlier, in April, the MHA had as proposed That states’ IPS officers who have not served on central deputation as SP or Deputy Inspector General (DIG) may be debarred from serving in central agencies at senior level. The home ministry reportedly issued this proposal because the central government has the largest number of vacancies at the SP/DIG levels and states do not release many officers on deputation to these ranks. However, no order has been issued in this regard, said a senior IPS officer working in a central agency.
Shortly before this in February, the government Approved An MHA proposal to do away with the long enlistment process for DIGs—the system through which officers from states are selected to serve in the central government. This was also done to remove IPS vacancies.
‘Disturbing’ and ‘objectionable’
Several retired and senior IPS officers ThePrint spoke to said the latest MHA order indicates “direct interference” in the administrative functioning of the states.
Speaking to ThePrint on condition of anonymity, a state DGP said, “If the state governments are not able to decide where to deploy their officers and when to promote them, it can seriously hamper their administrative functioning. There is interference.”
The DGP said the letter from the MHA shows that the central and state governments “emphasize on IPS cadre control”. He was particularly concerned that the IPS officers seemed to be on the “receiving end” of the issue as the MHA letter said any appointment could be canceled without the approval of the central government.
“Similar order had come for IAS (Indian Administrative Service) officers also in 2015 but it did not have a provision for cancellation. For IPS officers, the government has added the line ‘liable for cancellation’, which is very serious,” he said.
ThePrint has a copy of the August 2015 letter that the police officer referred to. It was addressed by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) to all chief secretaries and states were asked to take “prior concurrence of the Government of India” before promoting and appointing IAS officers. However, there is no mention of cancellation of appointments in this letter.
Former IPS officer Vappala Balachandran, who retired as Special Secretary in the Cabinet Secretariat, said the Home Ministry’s proposal was unprecedented and “objectionable”.
“This is clearly an overabundance by the central government. There should be some study on this. This has never happened before. The standard practice for states was to send a communication to the Center after the appointment or promotion of an officer to higher posts. This is another example of obstructing federal principles and encroaching on federal rights of states,” he said.
According to him, the states should oppose the proposal of MHA.
“States should register their protest. If the Center is prejudiced against a particular officer, they will reject the proposals related to it. It is also a way of curtailing the rights of the states to manage their cadres,” Balachandran said.
‘Some states don’t follow rules’
Some of the senior IAS and IPS officers ThePrint spoke to about the issue argued that the move could help bring in more “discipline” in appointments.
The chief secretary of the opposition-ruled state investigated the possible reasons behind the letter.
“It appears to be tightening rather than distorting in nature. It is a carefully crafted letter, intended to achieve many undisclosed things without deviating from a given plan,” he told ThePrint. It is also a reminder to the states of the importance and authority of the MHA as a cadre management authority.”
Another senior IAS officer said that the states which are flouting the rules may be more “irritable” than others by the central government.
“There are some states which do not follow the rules of management of vacancies and communicate appropriately with the Center regarding promotion or appointment of officers. Those states may panic,” he said.
“Cadre management discipline is good”, he said, “as long as the Center does not interfere with the states in promoting their specific disciplinary actions or powers in the field.”
Read also: IPS officer who headed Ishrat Jahan’s investigation a month before retirement sacked from service