SC disapproves of states appointing acting DGPs on the eve of retirement

The Supreme Court on Tuesday disapproved of the practice of state governments naming favorites like DGPs on the eve of their retirement, so that they could have a two-year term beyond their retirement age at 60 years.

This practical problem was reported to the Court by Attorney General KK Venugopal.

"Officers on the verge of retirement are appointed by the states so that they can have a warrant of 62 instead of 60," Venugopal told a three-judge bench led by CJI Dipak Misra during a hearing on the pace. police reforms in the states mandated by the court.

CJI Misra agrees with the position that states can not simply name their favorites as acting DGPs. "What is this interim (interim) activity (DGPs)?" He asked to know. States must refrain from appointing active DGPs, he said.

Rather, he insisted that states must appoint officers who have a minimum of two years to retire as a DGP.

Militant lawyer Prashant Bhushan, appearing for petitioner PIL Prakash Singh, said states have flouted the court's order, which orders UPSC to screen three eligible candidates for the position and the State to choose one from the list. The states, he argued, have appointed their own agents bypbading the UPSC. He suggested that the court insist that state governments go through UPSC selection so that this practice can be curbed.

"There is no conflict about this, let us go by the common sense approach," said the CJI, ordering the UPSC to now prepare a short list of eligible officers for the post with contributions from the concerned state. The state could then make the final choice of the suggested panel of names.