Supreme Court says Nagaland, UPSC evading court's orders to appoint DGP; directs compliance within a week

The Supreme Court of India on Friday took strong objection to the delay by the Nagaland government and the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) in appointing a Director General of Police (DGP) in the State despite the Court's earlier orders to expedite the process [Prakash Singh and ors vs Union of India].A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha said that the State and the UPSC are evading its orders and warned of action if "Nagaland has not complied with our order by sending names of empanelled officers for the post of DGP ... Why is UPSC playing the ball? I am sorry you are trying to evade orders of this court."Though the UPSC sought 60 days to take a decision, the Supreme Court directed that the empanelment meeting for the next DGP's appointment be completed by December 19. "UPSC will be given a week now else your chairman will have to come here! ... We want a decision from UPSC within one week. That is it," the Court said."If this order is not complied with, then this court will be forced to use the coercive arm of law and ensure compliance with the directions of Prakash Singh," the bench cautioned..Incumbent DGP, T John Longkumer, was appointed to the post on June 27, 2018 for a three-year term, but was given an extension till August this year. He was recently recommended for a six-month extension, after the Central government had approved his inter-cadre deputation for the period beyond his retirement.Longkumer is from the Chhattisgarh cadre of the Indian Police Service.The petitioners then moved the present plea contending that the incumbent DGP continuing in office amounted to violation of the top court's judgment on police reforms in the Prakash Singh case..The Supreme Court had in October asked the Nagaland government to prepare a fresh list of eligible IPS officers for appointment to post of DGP. The bench had orally remarked that the incumbent DGP must be allowed to retire in peace rather than be re-appointed.The bench had also taken strong objection to present DGP Longkumer sitting in the official meeting for empanellment of IPS officers for the post of DGP since Longkumer was also recommended to the post..During the hearing on Friday, advocates Kaveetha Wadia and Astha Sharma, representing the petitioners, pointed out that the respondents had not filed a counter till date. The counsel for the State government said it was in consultation with the Union Home Ministry with regard to the appointment of new DGP. Walia submitted that they the State was delaying by not recommending the names of two senior IPS formers, former DGP Rupin Sharma and Janardhan Singh, but instead proposing the name of RP Kikon, a localite. Advocate Prashant Bhushan appearing for the original petitioner (Prakash Singh case in which the present application was filed), submitted, "If a senior most person is there and is fit on every basis why should not he be appointed? Longkumer's appointment was illegal totally since he was from Chhattisgarh cadre and did not even have 30 years experience when appointed. Unfortunately the UPSC seems to be going along with this charade. Minced meat has been made of the directions issued in the Prakash Singh case," he said. CJI Chandrachud then remarked that the names of Sharma, Singh and Kikon can be proposed as per existing seniority. The bench in its order noted that the UPSC sought 60 days time to convene the empaneling committee to make the appointment since consultation with Union Home Ministry was needed. However, the same was declined by the bench which ordered the UPSC tohold empanelment meeting within a week. "We note that UPSC has no justification to state that tenure of Longkumer will be over on February 23. The UPSC is duty-bound to comply with the Supreme Court's orders and [we] decline the 60-days time sought.".[Follow live coverage of hearing below].[Read order]