[Maharashtra DGP appointment] Bombay High Court reserves verdict on plea to adhere to UPSC recommendations

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on the plea filed by a lawyer seeking directions to the Maharashtra government to appoint Director General of State Police (DGP) based on recommendations of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) [Datta Mane v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.]. .The petitioner, Datta Mane claimed that the current DGP of Maharashtra Sanjay Pandey was merely an ‘acting DGP’ and was not one of the candidates whose name had been suggested by former chief secretary Sitaram Kunte to the Empanelment Committee of UPSC.Mane's counsel Abhinav Chandrachud backed his claim based on the minutes of meeting dated November 1, 2021 which were signed off by Kunte in which the Committee recommended three names - Hemant Nagrale (the present Mumbai Police Commissioner), Rajnish Seth and K Venkatesham..Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni representing the Maharashtra government argued that when previous DGP Subodh Jaiswal was appointed Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation, there was a void that was created which was required to be filled immediately. He pointed out that the present DGP was the senior most in the department and there was no one above him.Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh on behalf of Central government expanded on Chandrachud's submissions. He argued that once the recommendations which had been finalised and approved by the State chief secretary was submitted, there was no way an objection could be raised to those recommendations..During the course of hearing, the Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice MS Karnik mused whether the former chief secretary who was party to the Committee and had agreed to the three recommendations, can later say commission was not right in discarding a certain name of aspirant."Why did the Chief Secretary sign the proceedings? Why did he not before signing, ensure that his note of dissent or objection was recorded. He is Chief Secretary of the State," CJ Datta enquired.The Bench also sought to know if there was any provision under which the Maharashtra government could make a representation to the empanelment committee after Supreme Court judgment in Prakash Singh case which gave explicit directions for the State to follow when it comes to appointment and service conditions of police officials. .The current DGP Pandey also approached the Court seeking to intervene in the PIL as a "party who will be most affected by the order". However, the Bench was not inclined to allow the intervention opining that Pandey did not have a "right to his post" and no right to intervene in the case."You are bringing in issues which are foreign for our consideration. Whether UPSC has properly appreciated your credentials, it is not for the High Court to look into at the first instance," CJ Datta said while reserving the plea.