Rajasthan’s outspoken 2009-batch IPS officer, Mr. Pankaj Chaudhary, has once again emerged victorious in a long-standing standoff with the state government. Known for frequently clashing with those in power—be it during Ms. Vasundhara Raje’s tenure or Mr. Ashok Gehlot’s—Mr. Chaudhary has faced repeated disciplinary actions, including multiple charge sheets and even dismissal from service. Yet, every time, he challenged these actions in court—and every time, he prevailed.
Most recently, on February 12, 2025, the Department of Personnel issued a demotion order against Mr. Chaudhary. This action, taken under the current Bhajan Lal Sharma-led government, was also met with resistance. Mr. Chaudhary moved the Jaipur bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which ruled in his favor and set aside the demotion order. The tribunal observed that the grounds for demotion—based on personal family matters—were unfounded.
The controversy stemmed from allegations that Mr. Chaudhary had married a second time without officially divorcing his first wife. A charge sheet had earlier been filed during the tenure of the Vasundhara Raje government, and a departmental inquiry was initiated. However, Mr. Chaudhary maintained that his personal life had been unnecessarily politicized. He pointed out that the Allahabad High Court had already issued a decree in his favor regarding the divorce, and there was no justification for repeatedly raking up the issue.
While five of his IPS batchmates—Ms. Shweta Dhankar, Mr. Kunwar Rashtradeep, Ms. Preeti Jain, Mr. Ajay Singh, and Mr. Yogesh Yadav—were promoted to the rank of DIG two years ago, Mr. Chaudhary’s promotion was withheld. Instead, he was demoted over the family matter, which has now been nullified by the tribunal, clearing the path for his long-overdue promotion to the rank of IG.
Mr. Chaudhary has alleged that certain IAS and IPS officers with personal grudges have consistently misled the government, leading to unwarranted actions against him. Over the past decade, he claims that six such punitive actions have been taken, and in each case, the court has ruled in his favor.
