Does Meghalaya need a retired DGP to be reappointed as security advisor to the Government with pay and perks? What then is the role of the incoming DGP if not the safety and security of the state and its people? There are many reasons why people retire from their positions. It gives the new incumbent enough elbow room to improve the performance of his team by redesigning the whole system, of course, within the ambit of the Indian Police manual. In the past four years, the appointment of police personnel left much to be desired and was rife with political influence. Not that this is new to Meghalaya. Postings and transfers purely on merit are rare. This insidious political influence in the appointment especially of mid-career personnel is debilitating for the force. The question is why do politicians have to interfere in each and every posting and transfer. Is the bureaucracy a slave to politics? Isn’t that why most officers, especially those that wish to serve the people in right earnest, move out of Meghalaya to serve elsewhere?
The Meghalaya Government has yet again violated Supreme Court orders dated July 3, 2018 which said that a state government cannot appoint an acting Director General of Police (DGP). The states are supposed to approach the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) at least 3 months before the retirement of the sitting DGP. The Supreme Court had categorically directed all the states to send names of senior police officers to the UPSC for being considered as probable candidates to be appointed as DGPs or Police Commissioners as the case may be. The UPSC, in turn, will prepare a list of three most suitable officers after giving due weightage to merit and seniority and the states will then appoint one of them as police chief. The bench had further stated that endeavour should be made to appoint a person as DGP who has a reasonable period of service left. The apex court also observed that any rule made by states or any state law on the subject of appointment of police officers “will be kept in abeyance”.
In Meghalaya’s case the Government only started the selection process on Dec 16, 2021 just 15 days before the DGP was to retire. According to the 2018 ruling, the Supreme Court had cautioned state governments not to appoint DGPs without first consulting the UPSC. Meanwhile the Supreme Court taking cognizance of Mr Prakash Singh’s application for modification of its order of 2006 on Reforms and Transparency in State Police Force has allowed an officer with 6 months service left to be appointed DGP, since Mr Singh contended that states were using that clause to deprive deserving police officers from being appointed DGP. Will Meghalaya ever do anything right?
