CAPF Invoice weakens legislature, ignores judiciary, in opposition to federal construction: Opposition in Rajya Sabha | India Information
3 min learnNew DelhiUp to date: Mar 30, 2026 09:14 PM IST
Opposition MPs on Monday termed the Central Armed Police Forces (Common Administration) Invoice, 2026 unconstitutional and unfair and claimed that it sought to nullify a 2025 Supreme Courtroom judgment to section out deputation of IPS officers within the CAPFs. In addition they urged that the Invoice be despatched to a choose committee.
Throughout a dialogue on the Invoice in Rajya SabhaOpposition MPs questioned the intention and timing of the Invoice. On a petition of CAPF officers, the Supreme Courtroom in Could 2025 ordered that the federal government scale back the variety of posts earmarked for deputation within the CAPFs as much as the Senior Administrative Grade over a interval of two years and conduct a cadre overview of the CAPFs inside six months. The federal government had filed a overview petition, which was dismissed final 12 months. Now, a contempt petition by retired CAPF officers in opposition to the federal government is scheduled to be heard subsequent month.
TMC MP Md. Nadimul Haque questioned the content material and the way wherein the federal government has introduced the Invoice, which seeks to fill 50% of Inspector Common posts, 67% of Extra Director Common posts and all Particular DG and DG posts by IPS officers on deputation.
“As an alternative of strengthening the establishment, this Invoice weakens the legislature, ignores the judiciary and limits the function of states… This Invoice strengthens the Union to the extent that it violates the federal construction of the Structure,” he stated, including that the Invoice was not a reform, however an try at “management”.
Opposing the Invoice, DMK MP Tiruchi Siva stated, “What’s the motive for insisting on IPS (officers)? Are CAPF officers incompetent to steer their very own workforce.” He stated the Invoice would have an effect on the morale of the CAPF personnel. Whereas CAPF officers have to attend 15 to 18 years for a promotion, he stated, an IPS officer is promoted 4 or 5 occasions. He stated both the federal government ought to settle for the Opposition’s amendments or refer the Invoice to the choose committee.
AAP MP Sanjay Singh stated there had been many studies by the committee, together with one chaired by BJP chief Murli Manohar Joshi, recommending promotions for CAPF officers. Stressing that although he was not in opposition to the promotion of IPS officers, he stated, “don’t do that injustice with CAPF personnel. The nation won’t forgive you.”
RJD MP Sanjay Yadav stated that the officers combating on the borders and in opposition to terrorists in addition to within the courts had been now combating in opposition to the federal government too. He additionally batted for the Invoice to be despatched to the choose committee so the stakeholders could also be consulted. This was backed by SP MP Ram Gopal Yadav who additionally demanded the federal government withdraw the Invoice.
Story continues beneath this advert
Hitting again on the Opposition, BJP MP Sudhanshu Trivedi, requested what number of non-IPS officers had been appointed as DGPs in Opposition-ruled states.
Congress MP Vivek Tankha termed as unconstitutional Clause 3 of the Invoice, which supplies the federal government the ability to make guidelines for offering for the tactic, method and mode of recruitment, together with promotion and deputation, of CAPF officers. He claimed the clause tries to negate a Supreme Courtroom judgment via a rule-making provision, one thing which he stated even Parliament couldn’t do.
Leave a Reply