Dimapur, June 24 (MExN): Even as the public voice dwindles, the Nagaland Public Rights Awareness and Action Forum (NPRAAF) has submitted a memorandum to the Governor of Nagaland, PB Acharya, stating that it is “disappointed at the forced replacement of Rupin Sharma IPS as DGP by an officer junior to him in service.”
According to the memorandum, “The center had refused to act based upon the letter of the Chief Minister, Deputy Chief Minister and the Chief Secretary to bring in an outside state IPS cadre to be the new DGP of Nagaland who has not qualified the criteria to be DGP, taking into consideration the immaculate track record of Rupin Sharma IPS until pressure was fully exerted to the Home Ministry Government of India by the (Nagaland) State Government.”
The NPRAAF interpreted that “The action of the State Government is against the IPS (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1988 and against the wishes of the people of Nagaland who openly demanded his retention.”
Forwarding arguments made by the Nagaland Law Students’ Federation, the NPRAAF stated in the memorandum to the Governor that “the Supreme Court in its judgment on 24th April 2017 ruled that, if a chief secretary loses the confidence of the chief minister, he or she may be shifted to another post in the larger interest of administration but it cannot be applicable to the head of police force in the state and DGP cannot be removed merely on this basis, the SC said.”
“There is a difference in the role of the chief secretary as the chief executive of the state and the DGP of a state - their roles cannot be equated. While the chief secretary can be removed if he or she does not enjoy the confidence of the chief minister or does not have a complete rapport and understanding with the CM, the removal cannot be questioned unless there is a violation of some statutory or constitutional provision. But that is not so with the state police chief,” a bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deeapk Gupta had stated, as per the NPRAAF.
"The rule of law should not become a casualty to the whims and fancies of the political executive. In that event, the state police chief might be pressured laterally by the political executive and vertically by the administration. It is to ensure that no such pressure is exerted on the state police chief and if so exerted, then the state police chief does not succumb to such pressure that the judgment in Prakash Singh case provided for security of tenure and insulating police from the Executive,” the Bench had noted.
According to the anti-corruption Forum, the Nagaland State Government’s action is “against the constitution and an insult to the honest police officer who refused to bow down to Mantris and Babus for corruption. Such unethical action will demoralize the state police force and an honest public servant.”
The NPRAAF called the attention of the Governor that “if Rupin Sharma IPS does not qualify the set criteria of 30 years to become DGP, then what criteria were followed to appoint the new DGP? Secondly, if Rupin Sharma IPS DGP who is running 27 years in service of the Nation was appointed as a stop gap measure, where was the need again to appoint another young IPS as DGP who has put 20 years of service so do T. John Longkumer IPS who has put just 28 years of service.”
While reminding Governor Acharya that he is the “custodian of the constitution of India in the State of Nagaland,” the NPRAAF sought his “intervention to ensure that your Government acts judiciously and constitutionally following all set of rules while appointing the new DGP in the state of Nagaland.”
NPRAAF also appealed the Nagaland State Government to “follow the set criteria/rule of 30 years of service in appointing the new DGP of Nagaland, if there is no choice, but to go ahead with more experienced in service than Rupin Sharma IPS otherwise it will be injustice.”
The Forum also appealed “not bring in any police officer as DGP who does not qualify the criteria to become DGP as it will set wrong precedence.”
“However, till such time the new qualified DGP is installed in the state, Rupin Sharma IPS, who has already proven as an efficient police officer be reverted back as the DGP till such time, the Government of India approves the new DGP of Nagaland who qualifies the set Criteria to become DGP of Nagaland.”
According to the NPRAAF, the “wise intervention from your highest constitutional office of the state in tune with the standing Supreme Court Order, and in accordance to the rules of appointment for DGP, will instill people's faith and respect in Raj Bhavan.”
NPRAAF meets Governor of Nagaland
The NPRAAF met the Governor of Nagaland on Friday, June 22, on the Nagaland DGP issue.
“Barely a day after Renchamo P Kikon IPS was asked to take charge as the new DGP, the Home Ministry, Government of India, issued an appointment order of another new DGP of Nagaland who is an IPS officer of Chhattisgarh cadre in view of tremendous pressure from the (Nagaland) State Government,” the NPRAAF team said while visiting the Governor at Raj Bhavan, Kohima. This was stated in a press release issued by the NPRAAF today.
The anti-corruption watchdog seemed to have ‘explained’ to the Governor that the Supreme Court “has not drawn a line between acting, temporary or permanent DGP in its judgement.” The NPRAAF also handed over a memorandum to the Governor detailing their argument.
The NPRAAF pointed out to the Governor, according to its press release, that the Nagaland State Government “worked overtime to replace Rupin Sharma IPS as DGP for the reason best known to the government.”
It remains unclear if the Governor clarified these reasons for it was the Governor of Nagaland who was “pleased to order” Renchamo P Kikon, IPS, Additional DGP (L&O) to take over the charge of Director General of Police, Nagaland in addition to his normal duties, on June 20.
Without mentioning which team members of the NPRAAF met the Governor, their press release stated that “If the Government of Nagaland worked with the same stamina for the welfare of the state surely Nagaland will become very progressive.”
The NPRAAF also expressed anguish that Rupin Sharma IPS was threatened by a Government spokesperson of “disciplinary action alleging falsely that he has orchestrated protest in his support.” Thus, the NPRAAF requested the Governor “not to allow the Government to make intimidating statement basing on unfounded allegation.”
According to the NPRAAF, the Governor gave a “patient hearing” and assured the NPRAAF delegation that he will “take up the matter” with the Chief Minister of Nagaland and Home Ministry, Government of India.
