HC reserves judgement on DGP appointment

HC reserves judgement on DGP appointment
  • 56
    Shares

Srinagar: The J&K High Court on Wednesday reserved its judgement on a plea challenging the appointment of Shesh Paul Vaid as Director General of Police (DGP),J&K.
A division bench of Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey and Justice MK Hanjura reserved the verdict after hearing both the parties through their counsels.
SK Mishra who was then appointed as Director General of Prisons had approached the court through his counsels, Ajaz Ahmad and Shuja-ul-Haq challenging the appointment of SP Vaid as Director General of Police (DGP).
Mishra’s counsels said that the appointment of Vaid as DGP was in violation of Business Rules and the cabinet at the time of appointment did not take merit into consideration.
Advocate Ajaz said that as per the guidelines of Supreme Court, among three senior officers, top most meritorious and competent is to be selected for the post of DGP.
“The guidelines have not been followed while making the appointment and cabinet took it as non-agenda item. Mishra’s merit and his seniority were neither considered nor discussed,” he said.
Supreme Court has directed state governments to establish a State Security Commission to outline the procedure for selection of DGP but Jammu and Kashmir is yet to appoint such a commission. “Till the commission is formed, SC says that the guidelines have to be followed in the process of the appointment,” advocate Shuja submitted before the court.
He pleaded that government should promote Mishra on the post of DGP with all the service benefits and the order of Vaid’s appointment passed by state be quashed.
“The selection is based on pick and choose policy without considering the merit of other eligible candidates. The judgments of Supreme Court, IPS Pay Rules 2016, seniority experience and merits were not taken into considerations,” he said.
Advocate BA Dar representing the State government said that the appointment has made on the basis of the records available with the cabinet.
The court directed the state counsel to produce the records before the court within ten days and further directed the counsels to present the relevant judgments supporting their stand in the case within one week.