Context

Despite a recent Supreme Court directive to limit IPS officer deputations in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) continues to appoint IPS officers to senior roles. This has reignited concerns over the autonomy and career progression of Group A CAPF cadre officers.

Background

In Sanjay Prakash & Others vs Union of India (2025), the Supreme Court ruled that:

• Group A officers in CAPFs must be treated as “Organised Services” for all purposes.
• IPS deputations to Senior Administrative Grade (SAG) posts—up to the rank of Inspector General (IG)—should be gradually reduced, with a complete phase-out within two years.

Objective of the Ruling:
To ensure fair career progression for CAPF officers and reduce the long-standing dominance of IPS officers in leadership positions.

Role of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA)

The MHA oversees both the IPS and CAPFs. It has traditionally justified IPS deputations on grounds such as:

• Bringing in experienced leadership from state police cadres.
• Ensuring uniformity in leadership standards across forces.

Current Situation:
Since the May 2025 Supreme Court verdict, at least eight IPS officers have been appointed to senior CAPF roles, including as Commandants and Inspectors General, in apparent defiance of the court’s directive.

Key Concerns Regarding IPS Deputations in CAPFs

1. Career Stagnation for CAPF Cadre Officers
   • A significant share of senior posts (e.g., 50% of IG positions) is reserved for IPS officers.
   • CAPF officers typically take 25 years to become Commandants—a rank that should ideally be attainable in 13 years.
2. Erosion of Institutional Integrity
   • Continued IPS deputations hinder the autonomy and professionalization of CAPFs as elite forces.
3. Legal and Administrative Issues
   • Recognition of CAPF Group A officers as part of an Organised Service obligates the government to:
     • Conduct regular cadre reviews
     • Amend Recruitment Rules (RRs)
     • Provide Non-Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU)
   • Persisting with IPS appointments without these reforms undermines legal compliance and administrative consistency.
4. Violation of Equality and Natural Justice
   • Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution are relevant, as CAPF officers are denied equal opportunity in promotions compared to IPS officers.

Policy Recommendations

• Implement the Supreme Court Directive:
  Devise a transition plan to phase out IPS deputations to SAG-level and above within two years.
• Cadre Restructuring:
  Conduct cadre reviews and amend RRs to ensure internal promotions based on merit and experience.
• Grant NFFU to CAPF Officers:
  Provide financial parity and improved career pathways to boost morale.
• Parliamentary Oversight:
  Establish a standing committee to review deputation policies and career stagnation in CAPFs.
• Develop a Transparent Deputation Policy:
  Frame clear, objective criteria on eligibility, tenure, and purpose for inter-cadre deputations.

About CAPFs

The Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) are under the Ministry of Home Affairs and are responsible for internal security and border management. CAPFs include:

1. Assam Rifles (AR): Counter-insurgency and border security in Northeast India.
2. Border Security Force (BSF): Guards borders with Pakistan and Bangladesh; also deployed in LWE areas.
3. Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP): Guards the India-China border.
4. Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB): Guards borders with Nepal and Bhutan.
5. National Security Guard (NSG): Elite counter-terrorism unit; personnel deputed from Army and CAPFs.
6. Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF): Deployed for internal security, especially in Northeast, LWE areas, and J&K.
7. Central Industrial Security Force (CISF): Secures PSUs, critical infrastructure, airports, and provides VVIP protection.

Source: The Hindu