The Supreme Court has deferred to September 2 a hearing on a Public Interest Litigation alleging that the Odisha government attempted to bypass merit guidelines by introducing a junior police officer into the selection pool for the state Director General of Police.
A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana postponed the proceedings after noting that the state government’s formal response was not yet available on the official court record. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the state of Odisha, informed the court that a reply had been submitted, but Chief Justice Kant indicated that the bench needed to review the document before proceeding with arguments.
The apex court had previously directed the Union Public Service Commission not to finalize the list of shortlisted officers for the top police post until August 18. The outgoing police chief, Y.B. Khurania, was scheduled to complete his term on August 16.
Allegations Of Selection Irregularities
Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate P. Chidambaram argued in earlier hearings that the state administration sought to promote an officer holding the rank of Additional Director General of Police to render them eligible for the Director General of Police post.
Chidambaram detailed the timeline of candidate submissions, stating that Odisha initially forwarded a panel of officers to the commission in April before withdrawing it. A subsequent list submitted in May included three officers at the Director General of Police level and eight at the Additional Director General of Police level.
The petitioner’s counsel further pointed out that the state recalled its selection list shortly before a scheduled August 7 commission meeting intended to evaluate three qualified senior candidates. Chidambaram explained that the challenge was brought through a public interest petition because serving senior officers who are eligible for the post would be hesitant to initiate legal action against their employer.
Mandatory Selection Norms And Guidelines
The core of the legal challenge rests on compliance with directions established in the 2006 landmark Prakash Singh case. Under these mandates, state governments must select their police chief from a panel of three senior-most officers recommended by the Union Public Service Commission, chosen specifically on the basis of service length, performance record, and operational experience.
Additionally, the judicial guidelines mandate that an officer appointed to the top post must serve a guaranteed minimum tenure of two years, regardless of their scheduled date of retirement.
