800 CAPF Officers Move Supreme Court Against 2026 Act, Centre Defends IPS Deputation in Senior Posts

More than 800 serving Group A officers of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) have moved the Supreme Court against the Central Armed Police Forces (General Administration) Act, 2026, arguing that the law narrows their promotional avenues and effectively sidesteps a May 23, 2025 judgment that had called for a gradual reduction in Indian Police Service (IPS) deputation to senior posts. The Union government has defended the legislation in a detailed counter-affidavit, saying it does not overturn the earlier ruling and that IPS officers remain necessary to the country’s internal security framework.

The petitions, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, include officers decorated for gallantry. Among the lead petitioners is CRPF Assistant Commandant Bibhor Kumar Singh, a Shaurya Chakra awardee who lost both lower limbs and the fingers of his left hand in an anti-Maoist operation in Bihar’s Gaya and Aurangabad districts in February 2022. Another petitioner, Harshpal Singh, is a Kirti Chakra awardee for an operation in Jammu. The officers say the new law creates a “glass ceiling”, deepens stagnation in promotions — with first promotions delayed by 15 to 16 years in some cases — and violates Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution, besides infringing the doctrine of separation of powers.

What the 2026 law changes

The legislation was passed by Parliament in April 2026, with the Rajya Sabha clearing it on April 1 and the Lok Sabha on April 2. It was notified and brought into force on October 8, 2026, by the Ministry of Home Affairs. The Act sets out a common framework for recruitment, promotions, deputation and service conditions for Group A officers across the five CAPFs: the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), Border Security Force (BSF), Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) and Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB).

The challenged law retains a strong role for IPS officers in senior appointments. Under its provisions, 50 per cent of Inspector General (IG) posts are to be filled by IPS officers on deputation, at least 67 per cent of Additional Director General (ADG) posts are reserved for IPS deputation, and all Special Director General (SDG) and Director General (DG) posts are to be filled exclusively through deputation.

Sections 3 and 4 of the Act are specifically under challenge. The officers say these provisions, which regulate recruitment and service conditions “notwithstanding any court judgment” and empower the Centre to amend schedules by notification, are ultra vires. They also point out that the new law does not preserve the earlier practice of reserving 50 per cent of Deputy Inspector General (DIG) posts for CAPF cadre officers.

Officers say law defeats Supreme Court ruling

The petitioners argue that the Act was framed to negate the Supreme Court’s May 23, 2025 decision in Sanjay Prakash v. Union of India. In that case, the court had directed a progressive reduction in IPS deputation posts up to the Senior Administrative Grade, including the IG rank, within two years, and ordered a cadre review. The judgment came after nearly two decades of litigation over delays in promotions within the CAPFs.

The officers have asked the court to enforce the 2025 directions, declare that Higher Administrative Grade posts should be filled by eligible executive cadre officers, and require timely cadre reviews with cadre representation. They say fixed deputation quotas have no operational justification, discriminate against officers who have spent their entire careers in specialised roles such as border guarding, counter-insurgency, anti-Naxal operations and internal security, and harm morale within the forces.

Centre says IPS deputation remains essential

In its joint counter-affidavit, filed by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Department of Personnel and Training and the CRPF, the Union government said the 2026 Act “is not an attempt to sit in appeal over the judgement dated 23.05.2025” but instead “a permissible exercise which alters the legal foundation upon which the directions contained in the said judgement were premised.” The Centre said Parliament had legislative competence to enact the law and that it does not re-enact any provision earlier struck down.

The government argued that IPS deputation has been part of the CAPF structure since their recruitment rules were first framed and remains necessary for coordination with state police forces, internal security duties, counter-insurgency, left-wing extremism operations, border management and intelligence work. It rejected the contention that IPS officers are unsuited to CAPF leadership roles, saying they serve in relevant operational theatres and act as a bridge between the Centre and the states.

The Centre also disputed the claim that IPS officers dominate senior CAPF appointments. According to the affidavit, only 47 of 607 sanctioned DIG posts and 64 of 140 sanctioned IG posts are held by IPS officers. It further stated that the cadre review directed by the Supreme Court is being carried out within the framework of the new Act.

Case history and current status

The dispute stems from the Supreme Court’s May 2025 ruling, which called for a progressive reduction of deputation posts up to the Senior Administrative Grade within two years. When the Union government’s review petition was dismissed in October 2025, the controversy widened. Proceedings have since also examined 46 IPS deputations made after the judgment, and contempt petitions alleging non-compliance have been clubbed with the writ petitions challenging the Act.

A Special Bench is currently hearing the matter, and the challenge to the validity of the Act has a returnable date in November 2026. At stake is the leadership structure of the CAPFs, whose combined strength is roughly one million personnel engaged in border security, counter-insurgency and internal security duties, as well as the future career progression of officers recruited directly into the forces.