dailyO
Politics

How SC exposed the State in DGP Senkumar's fight against Kerala government

Advertisement
Vijayaraghavan Narasimhan
Vijayaraghavan NarasimhanApr 30, 2017 | 22:14

How SC exposed the State in DGP Senkumar's fight against Kerala government

Democratically, we are in for nothing less than a treat in the Senkumar (IPS) versus Nalini Netto (IAS) tussle, moved by the "reinstated DGP" against the current "chief secretary" of Kerala.

The Supreme Court is set to hear the contempt petition moved by IPS officer Senkumar against fellow civil servant Nalini Netto, chief secretary of Kerala, for the delay/refusal of the state to reinstate the former, as per orders of the top court.

Advertisement

With superannuation round the corner for Senkumar, one can surely anticipate sparks flying. Who would blink?

And, more appropriately, who would the Supreme Court allow the liberty to do so? Just the other day Chief Justice of India JS Khehar, while refusing to grant urgent hearing on a PIL seeking reforms in the police force across the country, on March 2, said: "Nobody listens to our orders."

"Police reforms are going on and on..." he added, while declining to list early a plea relating to the implementation of police reforms.

Now, in a historic first, the Supreme Court has directed  the state of Kerala to reinstate Dr TP Senkumar as the state police chief, by orders dated April 24, possibly till his retirement in May 2017.

It appears that the apex court deemed that it was time to "take law into its own hands", as it is entitled to, and deal with the executive in the only language it understands.

Let's recall the facts. Senkumar was appointed as Director General of Police by the UDF government of Oommen Chandy on May 22, 2015.

The Puttingan temple tragedy in which more than 100 lives were lost and 400 wounded occurred on April 10, 2016. This was followed by the case of the gruesome murder of Jisha, a Dalit woman, on April 28, 2016.

Advertisement

Elections to the state legislature were held in May 2016 and the results announced on May 19, 2016. Immediately thereafter, the files moved and Senkumar was transferred on June 1, 2016.

The state government relied on Sec 97(2) (e) of the Kerala  Police Act (KPA) -  "on being satisfied prime facie that it is necessary to do so" on ground of "cause serious dissatisfaction in the general public about efficiency of police in his jurisdiction".

The LDF government "cut and paste" the said provision while relying on the temple and Jisha tragedies as factual base to remove the DGP.

The court stated that mere repetition of the provisions of Section 97(2)(e) of the Act is not sufficient: "There must be some material on record (other than a newspaper report), but unfortunately nothing has been pointed out to us during the course of submissions."

The police officer did not take it lying down. He challenged the order before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Kochi - which turned down  the plea by sticking to the  language of "prima facie satisfaction" for the executive.

The Kerala High Court, through its orders issued on January 24, 2017, toed the line and refused to lift the veil to detect any political colour in the transfer. It was against such concurrent findings and undeterred by the legal impediment arising from it: Senkumar chose to move the Supreme Court. The LDF government fell for the bait.

Advertisement

Instead of sticking to the contours of the orders of transfer vide the statutory provision juxtaposed on the twin tragedy, the state went beyond and questioned the very appointment of the DGP as "irregular".

pinarayi_043017100600.jpg
A political jibe against UDF in a judicial proceeding has come to haunt the Pinarayi Vijayan-led LDF government in Kerala. Photo: PTI

The court stated: "We are also a little disturbed with the view expressed in the detailed counter affidavit and elsewhere that the appointment of the appellant was irregular if not illegal. If that is so and the State Government of Kerala is bent upon making irregular or illegal appointments to sensitive posts, then no one can help God's own country."

A political jibe against UDF in a judicial proceeding has come to haunt LDF. That also revealed a "political" mien the Supreme Court could not ignore.

According to the KPA read with the decision of the Supreme Court in Prakash Singh relating to police reforms, there ought to be a security of tenure of two years for the police officer de hors even the date of superannuation.

Though the then Kerala government had obediently introduced amendments to the local statute in 2006 following the directions in Prakash Singh case, they had ingeniously left out the role/consent of State Security Commission regarding the appointment or "relieving the responsibilities" of the state police chief, thus retaining control totally with the political executive.

These were the red rags which lifted the veil, as the court rendered: "This make-believe prima facie satisfaction by itself cannot take out judicial review of administrative action in the garb of subjective satisfaction of the State Government" to cut through the executive exclusivity.

To reinstate the DGP in office, a never before occurrence, making dirt of the right of the executive to have its own police chief.

A lesson that the central government and state governments would do well to learn for all times to come. And more so, if the state of Kerala is removed of its wagging, clipped tail.

Last updated: April 30, 2017 | 22:59
IN THIS STORY
Please log in
I agree with DailyO's privacy policy