New Delhi: After taking Cudgels with the center by filing a lawsuit to stop the CBI from registering a case in West Bengal, the Government of Mamata Banerjee on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that his landmark was mistakenly by setting upsc tasks to choose a three-person panel for the state post .
At Landmarks of Prakash Singh Judgment 14 years ago, SC has decided that countries were asked to choose DGP from the three senior officers – Most of the police were allowed by UPSC to stop countries from choosing a sensitive police officer and had provided DGPS for two years Apart from their retirement age.
Last week, SC had incited police officers to adjust to the ruling parties and register cases of political opponents on thin or reckless land only to deal with heat in the hands of their colleagues when the regime changed.
CJI N V Ramana-LED Bench said that the persecution of police officers, who worked on the orders of the previous regime, had to function as a lesson for all police forces throughout the country.
Appearing for WB, senior advocate Sidharth Luthra on Wednesday asked CJI led bench for hearing urgently about the application of countries seeking autonomy in choosing the DGP, whose term of office had ended on August 31.
It was said that the 2006 SC assessment was “not in conscialism with the constitutional framework and the existing law” and seized their autonomous countries in the election of the DGP / Police Chief (HOPF) from the most senior IPS officers in the country cadres.
Read the constitutional provisions to SC to attack the judgment of the police reform that is widely praised, the Bengal Government said, “The Constitution does not make up rising with the power to assess each official officer holding the DGP ranking in the state to determine the fitness to be appointed as DGP, Hopf of The State, because it is a state government that can have a direct opportunity to assess fitness ranking officers who have provided services to the state in state cadres.
“It is said that the UPSC role is limited to consulting the principles that will be followed in promotions and transfers and on the transfer The compatibility of the candidates for the appointment and not to seize the country’s jurisdiction to choose officers for the panel directed by SC.