New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned the Odisha government over the exclusion of senior IPS officer Susanta Kumar Nath (1993:Odisha) from consideration for the post of Director General of Police (DGP), particularly after the state withdrew his integrity certificate following a communication from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana was hearing a PIL challenging the process followed by Odisha for preparing the panel of officers for appointment as the next DGP. The proceedings are linked to the Supreme Court’s directions in the 2006 Prakash Singh judgment concerning the selection of state police chiefs.
SC Asks Whether Nath Was Being Treated as an Accused
The immediate issue before the Court was the withdrawal of IPS Nath’s integrity certificate after the CBI indicated that he might be required to be examined in connection with the investigation into alleged irregularities in the recruitment examination for Sub-Inspectors in Odisha.
Questioning Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Odisha government, the bench asked whether the state was effectively placing Nath in the category of an accused by withholding his integrity certificate.
The Court observed that withholding the certificate merely because an investigation was pending could lead to an inference that the process was putting “the cart before the horse”.
Read Also: SC Puts Odisha on the Spot: Did Govt Know of CBI Case When Nath’s Name Was Sent for DGP Post?
The Court also indicated that it would examine whether the CBI’s communication that Nath “may be required to be examined” was sufficient ground for withdrawing the integrity certificate and excluding him from the DGP selection process.
Why Was Susanta Kumar Nath Excluded?
Nath, a senior Odisha-cadre IPS officer and former Chairman of the Odisha Police Recruitment Board, was initially included among the officers whose names were sent by the state government to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for consideration for the DGP post.
The state had forwarded a panel of 11 senior IPS officers to the UPSC in May 2026 as part of the process to select a successor to the outgoing DGP. Nath’s name was subsequently withdrawn after the state received the CBI communication concerning his possible examination in the Sub-Inspector recruitment case. A revised proposal containing integrity certificates for 10 officers was then forwarded.
According to the state’s submissions, the CBI investigation covers the examination process, including the role of examination-conducting agencies, the Odisha Police Recruitment Board and other persons involved.
The CBI has sought permission to examine certain officials. Mehta told the Court that after those officials are examined, Nath may also be required to be questioned. He referred to a CBI communication dated August 4, 2026, and said the investigation remains underway.
Odisha Government’s Explanation
Mehta told the bench that the state had begun the DGP selection process around six months before the retirement of the incumbent police chief, in accordance with the framework flowing from the Prakash Singh judgment.
He maintained that the decision to exclude Nath was taken after the government received information from the CBI and was not aimed at targeting a particular officer.
“It was not done only for one person,” Mehta submitted, adding that if information concerning another officer had emerged, it too would have been communicated appropriately.
The state’s position is that the CBI investigation is still at an ongoing stage and that Nath could potentially be required for examination as the probe progresses.
Nath Was Not Named as an Accused in the FIR, Court Told
The proceedings have also focused on the distinction between an officer being required to be examined during an investigation and being formally treated as an accused.
Earlier proceedings were told that the CBI had registered an FIR in the Sub-Inspector examination case on November 12, 2025, and that Nath’s name was not included in that FIR. His name was subsequently sent to the UPSC in May 2026.
The issue became significant because Nath’s integrity certificate was later withdrawn following the CBI’s communication regarding his possible examination.
The Court is now examining whether that development by itself could justify withholding the certificate and excluding an otherwise eligible senior officer from consideration for the DGP post.
PIL Also Raises Questions Over DGP Selection Process
The broader PIL challenges the manner in which Odisha has proceeded with the selection of its next police chief and alleges that the process could result in a comparatively junior officer entering the zone of consideration in violation of the Supreme Court’s directions in Prakash Singh.
The 2006 judgment laid down a framework under which the UPSC has a role in preparing a panel of eligible senior IPS officers from which the state government selects its DGP.
The current proceedings have examined, among other issues, the composition of the eligibility list, the subsequent inclusion of officers promoted to the DGP rank and the circumstances in which Nath’s integrity certificate was withdrawn.
Questions Over Temporary Ex-Cadre Posts
The Court has also been examining Odisha’s decision to create two temporary ex-cadre posts at the DGP level.
During the hearing, senior advocate P. Chidambaram, appearing for a petitioner, argued that the creation of these posts and the subsequent elevation of officers affected the zone of consideration for appointment as DGP.
The state, however, explained that Odisha has a relatively smaller cadre strength and that the temporary arrangements were linked to vacancies arising from retirements and the movement of officers between levels.
Solicitor General Mehta sought time to respond to the Court’s queries concerning the ex-cadre posts. The matter has been adjourned to next week.
Court Yet to Decide on Nath’s Eligibility
The Supreme Court has not, at this stage, ruled on whether Nath should be restored to the DGP selection process or whether the state’s decision to withdraw his integrity certificate was legally sustainable.
The bench is examining the circumstances in which the certificate was withdrawn, the information available to the state and the implications of the ongoing CBI investigation for his consideration by the UPSC.
The proceedings therefore remain focused on the procedure followed by the Odisha government and the requirements governing consideration of eligible senior IPS officers for appointment as DGP.
Read Also: Odisha DGP Appointment: Chidambaram Alleges ‘Conspiracy’ Before Supreme Court
