Appointment of DGP set aside

High Court raps State government for disregarding Supreme Court’s directions

August 17, 2012 11:31 am | Updated 11:31 am IST - HYDERABAD

Director General of Andhra Pradesh Police, V. Dinesh Reddy briefing media persons on arrangements for by-elections in Andhra Pradesh, in Hyderabad on Monday. Photo: G.Ramakrishna

Director General of Andhra Pradesh Police, V. Dinesh Reddy briefing media persons on arrangements for by-elections in Andhra Pradesh, in Hyderabad on Monday. Photo: G.Ramakrishna

Hauling up the State government for consistently disregarding the Supreme Court’s directions, the A.P. High Court set aside the appointment of Director General of Police V. Dinesh Reddy as head of the police force (HoPF) on Thursday.

A division bench comprising Justice G. Raghuram and Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, while upholding the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), imposed costs on the government and on Mr. Reddy for filing the present writ petitions on ‘extravagant’ grounds. It allowed Mr. Reddy to continue as in-charge but without the salary attached to the HoPF post. P. Gautam Kumar, a senior IPS officer, had filed the case in CAT contending that the State government had not followed the Supreme Court’s judgment in Prakash Singh’s case while appointing the HoPF.

The CAT upheld his contentions and directed the government to follow the procedure indicated by the Supreme Court within a specified timeframe. Instead, the government and Mr. Reddy challenged the Tribunal’s judgment in the High Court.

Under the judgment, the government was required to send names of six senior most IPS officers to the UPSC which would shortlist three among them. The government could then appoint one of them.

It directed the government to forward to the UPSC within seven days of receiving the judgment the names of senior officers in higher administrative grade (HAG).

The UPSC would prepare the panel within two weeks and send it to the government.

Within a week from that time, a new HoPF would be appointed.

The court found fault with the way the present writ petitions are filed on “specious, artificial and extravagant grounds” and imposed costs of Rs.5,000 to be paid to Legal Services Authority.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.