SC seeks TN govt's response on plea for contempt action for appointment of acting DGP

New Delhi, Nov 7 (PTI) The Supreme Court sought the Tamil Nadu government's response on Friday on a plea seeking contempt action for the non-compliance of its earlier orders and appointing an acting director general of police (DGP) in the state.

A bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran issued a notice to the Tamil Nadu government and sought its reply on the contempt plea filed by Kishore Krishnaswamy in three weeks.

Appearing in the matter for the petitioner, advocate Prashant Bhushan said the court passed an order in another matter on September 8, directing the state to forthwith appoint a regular DGP from the recommendations made by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).

He said the state government had submitted at the time that a panel of names was given to the UPSC by hand on August 29.

"The order was passed on September 8 and today, we are on November 7, but still, the state is carrying on with the acting DGP. There is no appointment of a regular DGP till date," Bhushan said.

The plea filed by Krishnaswamy says "the respondent/contemnor herein has wilfully committed an act of contempt by appointing in-charge Director General of Police (DGP) and by deliberately withholding the appointment of the candidate from the finalised panel of three IPS officers recommended by the Union Public Service Commission".

It says according to the court's orders in the Prakash Singh case, passed on September 22, 2006 and July 3, 2018, the concept of an acting DGP is foreign and unknown to the law.

"Despite such clear and positive directions, the respondent/contemnor herein on August 31, 2025 had appointed IPS officer G Venkataraman as an ad-hoc appointment to the post of DGP, Tamil Nadu, in direct violation of the slew of directions passed by this court in Prakash Singh case," the contempt plea says.

The petitioner has said the previous DGP's office fell vacant on August 31 and the state government, being well aware of the same, ought to have anticipated the vacancy and taken appropriate and necessary measures well in advance to appoint a suitable candidate to the post.

He has submitted that during the earlier round of litigation, this court on September 8 requested the UPSC to consider the state's proposal expeditiously and thereafter, directed the Tamil Nadu government to appoint a regular DGP.

"However, despite the lapse of nearly 57 days from the date of vacancy, the respondent/contemnor had failed to appoint a suitable candidate for the appointment of a DGP for the state of Tamil Nadu and continuing to maintain status quo for no apparent reason," the plea says.

It further says the incumbent acting-DGP has been "handpicked by the current political dispensation to suit their political convenience and to protect their interests in the upcoming Tamil Nadu state Assembly election due in May 2026".

The plea has alleged that the acting DGP is functioning as a "mere echo-chamber" of the current political dispensation in the southern state, instead of impartially discharging his public and constitutional duties.

"This is a clear affront to the very purpose behind the directions passed in Prakash Singh case, which sought to insulate the police force, particularly its administrative head, from extraneous political pressures and to further ensure merit-based, stable and independent appointments," it says.

On August 18, the top court refused to hear a plea for contempt action against authorities in Jharkhand, challenging the appointment of state DGP Anurag Gupta, observing that its contempt jurisdiction cannot be invoked to settle political rivalries. PTI MNL SJK RC