A setback to officers’ struggle for recognition

The All Fool’s Day will now be remembered by CAPF cadres for another reason: the passage of CAPF (General Administrative) Bill in the Rajya Sabha.

The CAPF-cadre officers’ angst towards the Bill emanates from the fact that it overturns the Supreme Court’s well-considered directions to the Central government to implement its own instructions relating to the grant of Organised Group-A Service (OGAS) status to officers of these cadres.

The Bill is not only a travesty of justice and demoralising for CAPF cadres, who play a very important role in the country’s security matrix, but also a serious blow to an institutional transformation and strengthening of national security that the SC order’s implementation would have brought.

The Bill overturns a well-deserved recognition that the officers of five Central armed forces had got from the Supreme Court after a 14-year fight that led to a hard-earned legal victory.

The Bill does not address any of the festering administrative issues of the CAPFs. Instead of addressing the concerns of cadre officers, it simply aims to cement the reservation of higher supervisory and policy-level posts for IPS officers through an act of Parliament even though these were already reserved for them.

On benefits

The cadre officers were compelled to approach the court only after the Central government rejected their repeated pleas for the grant of OGAS, even though CAPFs are recognised as OGAS since 1986. It is important to note that all other 57 government services have all the OGAS benefits.

Among other things, the OGAS status implies that CAPF cadres were given Non-Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU) — a scheme introduced in 2009 to grant financial upgradation to services facing acute stagnation.

That the CAPF cadres face acute stagnation is apparent from the fact that an officer joining at the entry level 15 years ago is still at his initial rank in forces like the CRPF and BSF, with the position being only marginally better in other forces.

Supreme Court order's significance

The Supreme Court order’s implementation would have given limited succour to the officers in the matter of promotion. However, the most important benefit to these officers would have been the grant of NFFU.

The Supreme Court order’s implementation would also have ensured that the officers who grew with the organisations from the grassroots and were familiar with the operational philosophy and ethos of these forces — besides having deep insight of various operational, logistic, and human-resource management issues — rose to higher leadership roles.

This would have gone a long way in enhancing operational efficiency and thus national security. It is beyond comprehension why IPS officers, whose experiences were limited to policing and investigations, were considered more suitable to lead these specialised forces rather than a cadre officer.

The passage of the new Bill does not give finality to the festering issue. Once it becomes an Act, it is certain to be challenged in court. In several settled cases, the Supreme Court has unequivocally stated that the Legislature cannot override judgments, but may cure defects through valid amendments.

Further, the Bill’s raison d’être is not national security. The reasons mentioned in the statement of objectives have all been tackled by courts during the lengthy litigation. The Bill is also vulnerable on the ground of violating cadre officers’ fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

Sanjiv Krishan Sood is a retired BSF additional director general.

(Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.)