The High Court was hearing a petition filed by an activist alleging that the Telangana government had violated the rules of selection when appointing the DGP.

Explain Telangana DGP selection process High Court to state govt
news Court Wednesday, March 20, 2019 - 10:01

The Telangana High Court on Tuesday sought a response from the state government to explain the process of selecting a Director General of Police. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Thottathil B Radhakrishnan and Justice A Rajashekar Reddy directed the government to file an affidavit on the matter within four weeks. 

The High Court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Hyderabad-based activist, Vijay Gopal, who alleged that the government had violated the rules of selection and sought to quash the appointment of DGP, M Mahender Reddy. Reddy, the former Hyderabad Police Commissioner was appointed as the DGP in 2017 through a Special Act.

In his petition, Vijay sought the court to declare the Telangana Police (Selection and Appointment of DGP (HoPF) Act-2018 illegal and strike it down. The petitioner said that other senior officers would be deprived an opportunity to head the state police force, if the Special Act wasn't struck down.

The petition stated that the Telangana government came up with a 'colourable legislation' by initially making Mahender Reddy as acting DGP on November 2017 and then making him a permanent DGP on March 28, 2018 through the Special Act.

According to TOI, the petitioner’s counsel Yakarapu Sheelu told the court that the Act was brought in in March 2018 which was in tune with the Supreme Court judgment in Prakash Singh case, however it lacked the essence of the judgment.

Sheelu also told the court that the apex court’s order in Prakash Singh case make it clear that government should appoint the DGP from amongst three senior-most police officers of the department empanelled by the Union Public Service Commission. Telangana government had given a go by of this procedure, the lawyer contended, according to The Hindu.

Sheelu argued that the government borrowed a wrong precedent set by the AP government and brought in this Act. However, the bench differed with the argument but agreed with the petitioner that there was a need to bring in transparency, and asked the state government to specify its stand.