3,000+ CAPF Officers Challenge Law That Reserves Top Posts for IPS in SC

More than 3,000 serving Group A officers of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) have moved the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Central Armed Police Force (General Administration) Act, 2026. The petition has been filed by officers drawn from all CAPFs, including gallantry award winners and women officers.

The Act, passed by Parliament on April 2 and notified on April 9, lays down new rules for filling senior leadership positions in the CAPFs—comprising the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), Border Security Force (BSF), Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) and Central Industrial Security Force (CISF). It provides that 50% of the posts of Inspector General (IG), at least 67% of the posts of Additional Director General (ADG), and all posts of Special Director General and Director General shall be filled by Indian Police Service (IPS) officers on deputation. Prior to this law, such appointments were made through executive orders issued by the central government.

Notably, the Act does not continue the earlier executive practice of reserving 50% of Deputy Inspector General (DIG) posts for Group A CAPF officers. This has led to concerns that a larger proportion of DIG-level posts may now go to IPS officers on deputation, narrowing promotion prospects for officers who have served in the CAPFs for their entire careers.

The petitioners have asked the Supreme Court to declare Sections 3 and 4 of the Act as “ultra vires” of the Constitution of India. Section 3 regulates recruitment and conditions of service “notwithstanding any judgment, decree or order of any court” and specifies the percentage of posts reserved for IPS officers on deputation. Section 4 grants the Union government power to amend the First and Second Schedules of the Act through a notification when it is considered necessary or expedient in the public interest.

The petition also seeks implementation of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Sanjay Prakash v. Union of India, delivered on May 23, 2025. In that ruling, the court had held that Group A Executive Cadre officers of CAPFs form an Organised Group A Service. It directed a progressive reduction in the number of IPS officers on deputation in CAPFs, up to the level of Inspector General, within two years. It further asked for a time-bound review of cadre and service rules within six months.

Following the judgment, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) filed a review petition, which the Supreme Court dismissed on October 28, 2025, thereby making the judgment final. Subsequently, some retired CAPF officers filed a contempt petition in the court, alleging that the ministry had failed to implement the directions. It was in this context that the MHA introduced a Bill in Parliament in March 2026, which was passed and later became the CAPF Act. The provisions of this new law are seen as reversing the course set by the Sanjay Prakash judgment.

At the core of the dispute is a long-standing issue of representation in the top echelons of the CAPFs. IPS officers are typically appointed to leadership positions in central forces on deputation, while CAPF officers have contended that they should have a greater share of top posts based on their service experience. The government has defended its policy as necessary to maintain efficiency and an all-India perspective in commanding forces deployed across the country. The CAPF officers, on their part, argue that the new law violates fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16, and that the use of “notwithstanding any court order” in Section 3 undermines the basic structure of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has not yet fixed a date for hearing the petition. Legal experts say the case raises significant questions about the separation of powers, the limits of Parliament’s power to bypass judicial decisions, and the career rights of hundreds of thousands of CAPF personnel. The number of serving officers directly affected is estimated at more than 3,000 Group A cadre officers, though the implications of the Act could extend further down the hierarchy.