The Madras High Court on Monday (August 4, 2025) dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by a retired Superintendent of Police seeking a direction to the Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary and Home Secretary to initiate the process of appointment of Director General of Police/Head of Police Force (DGP/HoPF).

First Division Bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Sunder Mohan refused to entertain the PIL plea on the ground that the tenure of the incumbent DGP/HoPF Shankar Jiwal had not come to an end so far and therefore, it was premature on the part of the petitioner to approach the court.

In his affidavit, the petitioner N. Dhamodharan, 74, submitted he had retired from service as the Superintendent of Police in Special Branch-Criminal Investigation Department (SB-CID), after serving in the Police department for 35 years and hence, he was highly interested in the efficient functioning of the department.

He said, the Supreme Court had laid down broad guidelines for the appointment of DGP/HoPF of every State and Union Territory (UT) in the country in the well-known 2006 Prakash Singh’s case. The guidelines were issued to avoid complaints of short tenure and frequent transfer of the officers heading the police force.

Pursuant to Supreme Court orders, the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) issued elaborate proceedings related to the composition of the empanelment committee and insisted that the State government’s proposal be sent at least three months before the retirement of the incumbent DGP/HoPF.

Stating Mr. Jiwal was due to retire from service on August 31, 2025, the PIL petitioner claimed that the State government had not forwarded the proposal along with a list of eligible officers to the UPSC so far despite a specific representation made by him in this regard on June 6, 2025.

The petitioner further alleged the State government was deliberately delaying the initiation of the process of appointment of DGP only to make an officer in the rank of Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) as DGP/HoPF (in-charge), especially when the Assembly elections were fast-approaching.

According to him, eight officers in the rank of DGP were available in the State, and the names of all those officers should be sent to the UPSC’s empanelment committee, which would select three of them on the basis of merit and then ask the State government to appoint one of them as DGP/HoPF.