MHA To SC: Continue IPS Deputation In CAPFs, Avoid National Security Risk

Officials in the MHA said the government has filed a review petition, challenging the apex court’s landmark verdict in May this year, directing it to reduce and limit the deputation of IPS officers to the CAPFs, and also recognising the parent cadre of the various paramilitary forces as ‘Organised Group A service’, giving them all the promotional benefits. 

The officials said that in its petition with the Supreme Court, the MHA has asserted that sending IPS officers on deputation to CAPFs was entirely a matter of policymaking, which falls exclusively under the powers of the Executive and Legislature, as per the Constitution. Any direction in this regard by the court amounts to judicial outreach, which is against the system of balance of power, they said, quoting the pleas in the court.

Noting that sending IPS officers on deputation to the CAPFs is part of the Government’s strategic policy decision, keeping in view “functional necessity, lateral talent infusion and national security concerns”, the Government, in its petition, said, “The question — whether there should be deputation of IPS officers and to what extent — are matters purely of policy considerations… The Executive is best equipped to determine the balance of cadre officers and those on deputation.” 

In its petition, the officials said the MHA has also countered the argument that IPS deputations harm the promotion prospects of CAPF cadre officers, pointing out the statistics which show that IPS officers account for only 1.4 per cent of the Group A (Executive/General Duty) cadre across all CAPFs. It went on to argue that, thus, it cannot be said that their presence affects the promotional prospects of the cadre officers. 

The Government’s review petition was filed in response to the Apex Court’s May 2025 judgment, which upheld the Organised Group A Services (OGAS) status of CAPFs. This followed a long legal battle between IPS officers and CAPF cadre officers over command and promotion rights.

MHA's Pitch Before The SC

The court had then ruled that CAPFs — including the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), the Border Security Force (BSF), the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), the Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), the Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB), the National Security Guard (NSG) and the Assam Rifles — are to be treated as organised services for all purposes, thereby enhancing the career progression and pay parity. 

An order in 2019, which had granted Non-Functional Financial Upgrade (NFFU) and Non-Functional Selection Grade (NFSG) to CAPF officers, was a major milestone in this direction. The government, in its review plea, has argued that the original scope of the litigation was limited to financial benefits like NFFU and NFSG, but the May judgment went beyond its brief by granting full OGAS status to the CAPFs.

Officials in the MHA said that in its plea, it has argued that a significant reduction in IPS officers on deputation to CAPFs would “go against the spirit of federalism” and risk destabilising the national security architecture, because such officers have wide field exposure in dealing with a variety of crime situations.

In the petition, it is also argued that 98 per cent of CAPF personnel are troops, and only 2 per cent are officers. This makes the structure incomparable with civil services like IAS or IPS, where the ratio is altogether different, it is noted.