In the petition, DG prisons stated appointment in violation of Business Rules
Srinagar: The JK High Court on Friday directed the state government to file its response to objections raised by a fellow police officer over the appointment of SP Vaid as the J&K Director General of Police (DGP).
J&K Director General of Prisons SK Mishra raised the objections through a petition filed in the High Court by his counsels Advocate Ajaz Ahmed and Advocate Shuja-ul-Haq.
Advocate Ajaz argued that the appointment of Vaid as DGP was in violation of the Business Rules as the cabinet at the time of his appointment had not taken the merit of Mishra’s candidacy into consideration.
He said that as per the Supreme Court’s guidelines, if there are three equally senior officers, then the most meritorious and competent among them has to be selected for the superior post.
“The guidelines have not been followed and the cabinet took it as a non-agenda item. Mishra’s merit was neither considered nor discussed,” Advocate Ahmed argued.
After hearing the petition, the division bench of Justice Mohammad Yaqoob Mir and Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey issued a notice to the Ministry of Home Affairs, the J&K chief secretary, the J&K principal secretary to the home department, and to DGP Vaid for filing their objections.
In 2006, the Supreme Court in a verdict had directed all state governments to establish a state security commission to outline the procedure for selection of the Director General of Police, but Jammu and Kashmir is yet to set up the commission.
“The commission is to be formed so that the DGP would be accountable before the rule of law, but here the cabinet has done it in a pick-and-choose policy and, as such, there can be no transparency,” the lawyers argued.
Mishra had earlier challenged Vaid’s appointment before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), on the grounds that the appointment order was in violation of Business Rules and also against the SC verdict.
The lawyers argued that the CAT decision passed on September 21 be quashed and the J&K government be directed to promote Mishra to the post of DGP.
Mishra had also said in his petition that as the authorities, particularly the chief secretary and the principal home secretary, had committed wilful breach of law as laid down by the Supreme Court in the ‘Prakash Singh’ case, contempt proceedings should be initiated against them.
Mishra also submitted before the court that CAT had “fallen in grave error in holding that the directions passed by apex court were directory in nature and not mandatory.”
Mishra said in his petition, “When K Rajendra, ex-DGP, was on leave, Mishra held his charge. Mishra was empanelled as Additional Director General (ADG) with 1985 batch officers by the Government of India, while Vaid was dropped and was not empanelled as such with his batch mates of 1986.”
The next hearing of the petition will be on November 27.