A no holds barred fight has broken out between the Centre and the West Bengal Government over the fate of three IPS officers over an attack on BJP JP Nadda’s cavalcade last week. Centre wants then repatriated to Delhi but Mamata Banerjee Govt has refused to relieve then citing the scarcity of IPS officers in the state.
But the tussle between the two had been going over for a while. While Narendra Modi Govt is undoubtedly over Mamata Banerjee sending less than the prescribed number of bureaucrats to the Centre, the latter has been complaining of getting less than the prescribed number of officers from the Central pool.
In fact, Bengal ranks low on the list of states in sending IAS and IPS officers for Central deputation. The reason behind this is the State’s continuous rejection for providing No Objection Certificates to the officers, which is necessary for their deputation.
According to the All India Service rules, every state is necessarily required to direct a minimum number of IAS and IPS officers, which is approximately 25 percent of its total cadre strength for central deputation. This number is known as the state’s Central Deputation Reserve (CDR). In the case of Bengal out of 78 IAS officers, according to CDR, the state has relieved only eight for deputation, and out of 86 IPS officers; it has only relieved just 12 for Central deputation.
“This is a routine complaint made by officers in West Bengal — that we are not sent for central deputation. Officers send their names, but they are not cleared by the state government on account of shortage or something else,” said a Bengal-cadre IPS officer.
The three officers caught in the crossfire this tiny are Rajeev Mishra ADG, South Bengal; Bholanath Pandey SP, Diamond Harbour; and Praveen Tripathi DIG, Presidency Range.
The state government has been continuously defying the Centre’s orders. CM Mamata Banerjee
accused the Central Government of misusing its power. She said: “”GoI’s order of central
deputation for the three serving IPS officers of West Bengal, despite the state’s objection, is a
colourable exercise of power and blatant misuse of emergency provision of IPS Cadre Rule
1954.”
Her tweet read:
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE RULES
The two governments are locked in an administrative battle but looking at the rulebook, there seems more weight on the Central Government’s side.
According to the laid out rules:
A) THE INDIAN POLICE SERVICE (CADRE) RULES, 1954
- Under the Indian Police Service Rules related to Cadres, rule 5 (1) for allocation of members to various cadres clearly states that “The allocation of cadre officers to the various cadres shall be made by the central government in consultation with the state government or state governments concerned.” And the central government may, with the concurrence of the state governments concerned, transfer a cadre officer from one cadre to another cadre. So, for the allocation of officers to a state or transfer from one cadre to another, the concurrence of the state government is necessary.
- However, in the case of deputation of officers under cadres, another rule, i.e., rule 6(1) implies that “A cadre officer may, with the concurrence of the state government or the state governments concerned and the central government, be deputed for service under the central government or another state government. But it adds that “provided that in case of any disagreement, the matter shall be decided by the central government and the state government or state governments concerned shall give effect to the decision of the central government”
Not just the IPS Cadre rules, 1954 but another act from the constitution also states rules, siding with the central government.
B) ALL INDIA SERVICE ACT 1951 – [G.I MHA File No. 1/66/50-AIS (I).]
Even when it comes to IAS officers, as well as other all-India services officers, being posted from one cadre to another, the Centre receives higher points. According to the instructions are given by the Government of India, rule 6 suggests:
- “The terms of deputation of a cadre officer deputed to another state shall be finalized by the borrowing government in consultation with the lending government. If there is any point of difference between them, it may be referred to the Government of India.”
Various senior officers have come in support of the Central Government’s decision.
Ex-DG of UP police Dr. Vikram Singh said, “The rules are very clear. In case of disagreement between Centre and state over deputation of an IPS officer, the Centre’s will shall prevail.”
Another officer, who is a former senior IPS officer and member of the executive committee of Retired IPS Officers’ Association, DN Srivastava said, “The appointing authority of the IPS cadre is the President of India. The officers are “provided” to the state governments by the Centre and the Centre has the final say.”
The two big governments are at loggerheads with each other and nobody is quite sure what fate might the final decision bring for the three IPS officers stuck in the heart of the squabble.
