Plea against appointment of Delhi Police chief to be listed for hearing after being numbered: SC

The Supreme Court said the contempt plea against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah for appointing Rakesh Asthana as Delhi Police Commissioner in alleged violation of a judgment would be posted for hearing if the registry has numbered it.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Tuesday said the contempt plea against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah for appointing Rakesh Asthana as Delhi Police Commissioner in alleged violation of a judgment would be posted for hearing if the registry has numbered it.

"If it is numbered, we will post it for hearing," a bench comprising Chief Justice N V Ramana and Justice Surya Kant told lawyer M L Sharma who was seeking a listing of his plea for hearing on Monday. "I have filed a contempt petition against the appointment of Rakesh Asthana," Sharma said.

A 1984-batch IPS officer, Asthana, serving as the director-general of Border Security Force, was appointed Delhi Police Commissioner on July 27, four days before his superannuation on July 31. He will have a tenure of one year as police chief of the national capital.

According to the petition, the Prime Minister, who is the head of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet, and the Home Minister jointly decided and appointed Asthana as the Commissioner. The petition alleged this is against the judgment of the apex court in the Prakash Singh case.

In his petition, Sharma said that according to the apex court's judgment of July 3, 2018, the process of appointment should begin three months prior to the vacancy and the person being appointed must have a reasonable period of service left.

Besides the contempt action, the plea has sought a declaration from the apex court that the appointment of Asthana is held illegal being contra to the judgment dated July 3, 2018. The top court had issued a slew of directions on police reforms in the country and ordered all states and Union Territories not to appoint any police officer as acting Director General of Police (DGP).

Read: Pegasus row: Scribes say spying violated their rights, SC to hear pleas Aug 5

It had also directed all states to send the names of senior police officers to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for being considered as probable candidates to be appointed as DGPs or Police Commissioners as the case may be.

The UPSC, in turn, will prepare a list of three most suitable officers and the states will be free to appoint one of them as police chief, it had said. The bench had also said that endeavor should be made that a person, who had been selected and appointed as DGP, has a reasonable period of service left.

These directions were issued on interim pleas which were filed in the disposed of PIL, titled Prakash Singh versus Union of India. Prior to this, the apex court, deciding the PIL filed by two former DGPs Prakash Singh and N K Singh in 2006, had given a slew of directions, including setting up a state security commission to ensure that the government does not exercise unwarranted influence on the police.

It had then said the appointment of DGPs and police officers should be merit-based and transparent and officers like DGPs and Superintendent of Police (SP) should have a minimum fixed tenure of two years. It had recommended separation of police functions of investigation and maintaining law and order.

Read: 2019 Hyderabad encounter: Why this matter is going on and on, asks SC

PTI