The Supreme Court has upheld the Gauhati High Court verdict, which observed that Rule 63(iii) of the Assam Police Manual was invalid being in direct conflict with Section 14(2) of the Assam Police Act, 2007 (Act).
The Bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Sanjay Kumar ruled on January 18 that the earlier system of governance under the Police Act 1861 was different from the present one, adding that the counsel for the Deputy Commissioner exercised far wider powers, being the head of the criminal and police administration .
Rule 25(c) of the Manual, which entitled the Deputy Commissioner to order an enquiry in case of misconduct by a police officer, was in direct variance with Section 14(2) of the Act as it divested the Deputy Commissioner of such disciplinary power, observed the Bench.
It said merely because officers were deployed/deputed in the State of Assam, they cannot be denied the benefit of the All India Services (Performance Appraisal Report) Rules, 2007, which would be applicable all over the country.
The 2007 Rules define reporting, reviewing, and accepting authorities to mean that they must all be from the same service or department. However, a Deputy Commissioner, either an IAS Officer or a State Civil Service Officer, would be independent of the police department.
The Apex Court ruled that intervention by him/ her during the exercise of performance assessment of SPs of the districts was in direct conflict.
It said the Government was given the discretion to empower any of the authorities who supervised the performance of the officer reported upon to assume such a role. However, it held that such discretion cannot mean that someone outside the department could be given such power.
It said the effect, Rule 63(iii) of the Manual does not fit in with the scheme obtaining under the 1970 Rules and the 2007 Rules.