Supreme Court Reserves Judgment In Challenge Against Dinkar Gupta's Appointment As Punjab DGP

The Supreme Court on Wednesday reserved judgment in the batch of special leave petitions moved against the Punjab and Haryana High Court's order upholding the appointment of Dinkar Gupta as the Punjab DGP. The petitions had been filed by IPS Officers Mohammad Mustafa and Siddarth Chattopadhyay who were not considered for appointment as the top police officer of the State of Punjab.A Bench comprising Justices LN Rao, Sanjiv Khanna and BR Gavai on Wednesday heard concluding arguments from from the concerned parties and thereafter directed that any additional written submissions must be filed by September 17. Furthermore, the counsel appearing on behalf of the UPSC was also ordered to submit the assessment reports relied upon for the selection of the candidates by Friday. BackgroundIPS Officers Mohammad Mustafa and Siddharth Chattopadhyay (1985 and 1986 batch belonging to Punjab Cadre respectively) had approached the Central Administrative Tribunal ("CAT") challenging order dated February 7, 2019 wherein the Government of Punjab appointed Dinkar Gupta, an IPS officer of 1987 batch of Punjab cadre, as Director General of Police, Head of Police Force based on the recommendations of UPSC Empanelment Committee. A Two member bench of CAT Chairman L Narsimha Reddy and M Jamshed upon IPS Officer's application quashed Gupta's appointment as DGP and observed that the procedure adopted by UPSC and the Empanelment Committee for preparation of the panel for the purpose of selection and appointment of DGP was violative of the procedure stipulated by the Supreme Court Prakash Singh & others v. Union of India & others. Aggrieved by the CAT's order, UPSC, State of Punjab and Dinkar Gupta had approached Punjab and Haryana High Court. The division bench of Justices Sawant Singh and Sant Prakash on November 6, 2020 while holding that the CAT "exceeded its power of judicial review by transgressing into the domain of law regarding judicial review of the decisions/ recommendations of the Selection Committee," set aside CAT's order that had quashed Dinkar's Appointment.Submissions advanced by counsels Serious cloud on the integrity of Siddharth Chattopadhyay: Mukul Rohatgi Representing the State of Punjab, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi argued that the Supreme Court in its judgment dated March 13, 2019 in Prakash Singh v. Union of India had stressed that appointment of the DGP of a State must be made 'purely on the basis of merit' from officers who have a minimum residual tenure of six months i.e. officers who have at least six months of service prior to the retirement. The Apex Court had also interpreted 'suitability' of selection to mean that the person selected must have a wide range of experience of heading a police force. To this, Justice Khanna remarked, "the Supreme Court had also stated that seniority must be given weightage". In response, the senior counsel submitted, "If you have 30 years of experience, concept of seniority is inbuilt. By and large amongst all candidates seniority is already there. In a pyramidal structure, by and large everyone is equal when it comes to seniority". The Bench further enquired from the senior counsel, "Did you send the names of all officers who had completed 30 years of service to the Empanelment Committee?"In response, senior advocate Rohatgi submitted, "We sent the names of everyone who had completed 30 years of service except those who did not have the mandated minimum tenure of at least two years of continuous service."It was further argued that as per the directions laid down in Prakash Singh v. Union of India, the State government had to appoint the DGP from amongst the three senior-most officers of the Department empanelled by the UPSC. "Three names were sent, we selected the current appointee (Dinkar Gupta) who was the seniormost. Discretion was very limited, they are all top ranking officials", it was further stated by the senior counsel. Furthermore, it was also pointed out to the Court that the instant challenge was 'far fetched' in so far as the other two officers i.e. out of whom Dinkar Gupta was finally selected (final round of 3) had not preferred any challenge. Instead, two officers i.e. Mohammad Mustafa and Siddharth Chattopadhyay who were knocked out in the selection round of 12 had preferred the instant challenge. "Officers who were only in the zone and not tipped to the post have posed a challenge", it was submitted. The senior counsel also apprised the Court that the assessment sheets for selection of candidates had been given in a sealed cover both to the High Court as well as the CAT. With regards to the allegations of bias levelled against Suresh Arora the then DGP who was the ex-officio member of the Empanelment Committee for the selection of panel for the post of DGP (Head of Police Force), it was argued that Arora was a member of a multi-member committee and that he was not the sole person in charge of the selection. There were officers far senior to Arora in the...

Supreme Court Reserves Judgment In Challenge Against Dinkar Gupta's Appointment As Punjab DGP

Aaratrika Bhaumik

Tags