By Our Correspondent
BHUBANESWAR: In a new twist to Odisha DGP selection process, which under the jurisdiction of Supreme Court and hearing going on, an affidavit filed by the Union Public Service Commission dated October 16, read by the www.indianewsdiary.com says Level-15 officers cannot automatically displace eligible Level-16 officers; the prescribed sequence must be followed . The UPSC further said “ The State of Odisha, not the UPSC, is responsible for withholding an integrity certificate,”
Now on 16 Oct 2026, the UPSC has submitted an affidavit through its advocate Radhika Gupta claiming that the cut-off date is 16 August 2026, not the date when the proposal was initially submitted.
Promotions and other changes reported by the State must be assessed as they stand on the vacancy date.
Level-15 officers cannot automatically displace eligible Level-16 officers; the prescribed sequence must be followed.
The State, not the UPSC, is responsible for withholding an integrity certificate.
The government of Odisha on the advice of Prakash Mishra created a mess in the DGP (HoPF) case to appoint Tequila Liquor Bar linked, 1994 batch IPS Officer Sanjeeb Panda as HoPF without being eligible. The matter went to the Supreme Court. The pleadings are over and the judgment has been reserved long ago.
All these utopian ideas are backed by unsustainable averments. It’s like Kaun Banega Crorepati Question. An aspirant was appearing for the Civil Services Main examination. After handing over the written paper, he came out of the hall. He was totally frustrated over his performance. All the way he was brooding that had he written this and that, he could have cleared the exam in fine colours. After reaching home he penned down all his musings on paper and sent them to UPSC by speed post.
The question is, will UPSC consider it? Wondering?The KBC question is – will these be considered?
Petitioners allege the state tried to bypass the Supreme Court’s 2006 Prakash Singh guidelines on police reforms. Those require the UPSC to prepare a panel of the three senior-most eligible officers (based on length of service, record, and experience) from which the state selects the DGP.
Issues raised include : Initial forwarding of three DG-rank officers’ names to the UPSC, later expanded to a wider list (around 11 officers, including ADGP-rank). Subsequent promotion of two 1994-batch IPS officers (Sanjeeb Kumar Panda and Yeshwant/Yashwant Kumar Jethwa) to DGP rank via temporary/ex-cadre posts, and their inclusion in revised lists.
Exclusion of senior IPS officer Susanta/Sushant Kumar Nath (1993 batch), including withdrawal of his integrity certificate after a CBI communication that he “may be required to be examined” in a Sub-Inspector recruitment irregularities probe (FIR from November 2025; Nath not named as an accused).
A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana heard the matter multiple times in September 2026. On 29 September 2026, after concluding arguments including on ex-cadre posts and the revised panel, the Court reserved its order/verdict.
During hearings, the CJI observed that states often try to derail the process or appoint a DGP of their choice instead of following Prakash Singh. The bench indicated it would also examine compliance in a related Jharkhand DGP matter listed around 8 October 2026 and questioned the UPSC’s approach. The judgment was expected after the Jharkhand hearing. The process remains stalled pending the Court’s decision, with the acting DGP continuing in the role.
