Supreme Court Plea Alleges Breach Of Prakash Singh Guidelines In Odisha DGP Appointment

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a PIL against the Odisha government's decision to appoint the Director General of Police, in breach of the apex court's directions issued in the 2006 Prakash Singh case.

Senior Advocate P Chidambaram mentioned the issued before a CJI Surya Kant led bench today saying that the state government is trying to include a junior officer in the list of probable candidates for the Director General of Police post.

The incumbent DGP, YB Khurania, will demit office on August 31 this year. Chidambaram informed court today that UPSC was scheduled to meet on August 7 to consider a panel of three eligible candidates for the Odisha appointment, but the state withdrew the list of officers.

"The State of Odisha is breaching the Prakash Singh judgment. On August 7, the UPSC was scheduled to meet to select from among the three DGPs. Odisha withdrew the list. They are now making another list to send," the senior lawyer submitted. 

"They are trying to promote an ADGP, either today or last night, and then smuggle him into the list and get him considered," he added. To this, the CJI said that as per an earlier order, the UPSC is duty-bound to approach the court in case of non-compliance of the directions.

In February 2026, the Supreme Court reiterated that States must follow the prescribed procedure for appointing DGPs. Under the framework, the UPSC is required to prepare a panel of eligible officers, following which the State government must appoint the DGP from among those empanelled.

The Court has also made it clear that the prescribed eligibility criteria cannot be bypassed merely because the number of eligible officers is limited. Under the existing framework, the apex-level DGP post in Level 17 is to be filled through selection from among officers holding DGP-level posts in Level 16.

 The Supreme Court had also directed States facing disputes over DGP appointments to adhere to the prescribed procedure and required the UPSC to make its recommendations within the stipulated timeframe after receiving a revised proposal from the concerned State.

The Supreme Court’s landmark Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006) judgment laid down key guidelines to insulate the police force from political interference and ensure greater professionalism in policing. One of its significant directions concerned the appointment and tenure of the Director General of Police (DGP). The Court directed that the State Government must select the DGP from among the three senior-most eligible officers, who are empanelled by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) based on their length of service, very good service record and experience in heading a police force. The selected DGP must be provided a minimum tenure of two years, irrespective of the date of superannuation.

The Court subsequently clarified that the two-year requirement refers to the minimum tenure after appointment, and does not mean that only officers with two years of residual service can be considered. In 2019, it directed that the UPSC panel should comprise officers having at least six months of residual service before retirement.

Bench: CJI Kant, Justice Bagchi and Justice Mohana

Mentioning Date: August 11, 2026