Proceedings on Punjab DGP selection can’t be made public: UPSC to HC

The UPSC response came to a July 2 order of the Punjab and Haryana high court in which the court had posed a number of questions with regard to procedure for appointment of DGPs

Chandigarh Invoking privilege in sharing information, the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) has told the Punjab and Haryana high court that the assessment sheet of various police officers considered by the Commission for the appointment of Punjab Director General of Police (DGP) in 2019, can only be shared with the court, not with others.

HT Image

The UPSC response came to a July 2 order of the high court in which the court had posed a number of questions with regard to procedure for appointment of DGPs in the country and also asked the commission to prepare an assessment sheet of all those considered by the UPSC for this post. The court had passed the order in petitions filed by Punjab government and DGP Dinkar Gupta challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) order quashing the appointment of Gupta as the Punjab police chief.

In January, the high court had stayed the CAT order. Two IPS officers, Mohammad Mustafa and Siddharth Chattopadhyaya have challenged the appointment. A 1987-batch IPS officer, Gupta had superseded five senior officers on February 7, 2019.

“UPSC does not accord permission to anyone under Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to produce the assessment sheet of empanelment committee and as such as per established convention of the UPSC, the Commission claims privilege under the Act,” the court has been told in a written statement. It adds the UPSC has no objection, whatsoever, in sharing the sheet with the court, for its legal scrutiny and satisfaction.

The commission says it got involved in the selection of DGP’s appointment in 2006, after a Supreme Court order for which guidelines have been framed in 2009. Detailing about the same, it says the officers from the cadre concerned from not below the rank of ADGP rank are to be considered and those who have at least 30 years of service on the date of occurrence of vacancy are included in the zone of consideration. However, the zone of consideration may vary from the state to state depending upon the availability of ADGPs and above level officers with residual service of six months.

It has clarified that state governments are mandatorily asked by UPSC to forward the list of all eligible officers and their relevant documents. “State governments have no say in restricting the zone of consideration. It is mandatory for the state governments to send names of all officers, who fulfil requirement of eligibility,” it says.

To the contention raised by these two officers that Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) guidelines were flouted, the Commission says, DoPT guidelines are not applicable in these appointments as the UPSC has its own mechanism.

It says that the UPSC takes into account the range of experience, very good service record, and length of service into account, while making recommendations as per inter se seniority of the officers. In March 2019, the Supreme Court has said that appointment should be based only on the basis of merit, it has informed court. The hearing in the matter will resume on August 13. The bench presided over by justice RK Jain took on record only response of the UPSC, and ordered that it be listed for hearing before the bench, which is already seized of the matter.