More than 800 serving Group A officers of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) have taken their challenge against the Central Armed Police Forces (General Administration) Act, 2026, to the Supreme Court, saying the law narrows their promotional path and runs around the Court’s May 23, 2025 ruling on Indian Police Service (IPS) deputation in senior posts. The Union government, however, has told the Court that the statute is valid and that IPS deputation continues to serve the country’s internal security setup.
The petitions have been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution and include officers decorated for gallantry. Among them is CRPF Assistant Commandant Bibhor Kumar Singh, a Shaurya Chakra recipient who lost both lower limbs and 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 Act creates a “glass ceiling,” deepens stagnation in promotions, with first promotions delayed by 15–16 years in some cases, and violates Articles 14, 16 and 21 as well as the doctrine of separation of powers.
What the 2026 Act provides
The legislation was passed 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 creates a common framework for recruitment, promotions, deputation and service conditions for Group A officers in 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).
Under the challenged 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. The petitioners have also objected to the fact that the Act does not keep the earlier practice of reserving 50 per cent of Deputy Inspector General (DIG) posts for CAPF cadre officers.
Sections 3 and 4 of the Act are specifically under attack. 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 contend that the law leaves them with fewer opportunities for advancement inside the forces.
Officers’ case before the Court
The petitioners argue that the Act was framed to defeat the Supreme Court’s May 23, 2025 judgment in Sanjay Prakash v. Union of India. That ruling had directed a progressive reduction of IPS deputation posts up to the Senior Administrative Grade, including up to the IG rank, within two years, and had ordered a cadre review. It followed nearly two decades of litigation over promotional stagnation in the CAPFs.
The officers want the 2025 directions implemented, want Higher Administrative Grade posts to be filled from eligible executive cadre officers, and seek timely cadre reviews with cadre representation. They also argue that fixed deputation quotas have no operational basis, discriminate against officers who have spent their careers in specialised roles such as border guarding, counter-insurgency, anti-Naxal operations and internal security, and hurt morale.
Centre’s defence of IPS deputation
In a joint counter-affidavit filed by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Department of Personnel and Training and the CRPF, the Centre said the 2026 Act “is not an attempt to sit in appeal over the judgement dated 23.05.2025” but is “a permissible exercise which alters the legal foundation upon which the directions contained in the said judgement were premised.” The government said Parliament had legislative competence to pass the law and that it does not re-enact any provision previously struck down.
The Centre’s stand is that IPS deputation has existed since the CAPFs were created under their recruitment rules and remains important for coordination with state police forces, internal security, counter-insurgency, left-wing extremism operations, border management and intelligence. It rejected the argument that IPS officers are unsuitable for CAPF leadership, stating that they serve in the relevant operational theatres and act as a link between the Centre and the states.
The government also disputed the claim that IPS officers occupy most senior posts in the CAPFs. According to the affidavit, only 47 of 607 sanctioned DIG posts and 64 of 140 sanctioned IG posts are held by IPS officers. It added that the cadre review directed by the Supreme Court is being carried out within the framework of the new Act.
Where the case stands now
The present dispute traces back to the Supreme Court’s May 2025 judgment, which ordered progressive reduction of deputation posts up to the Senior Administrative Grade within two years. The Centre’s review petition was dismissed in October 2025. Later proceedings 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 hearing the matter, and the challenge to the Act has a returnable date in November 2026. The outcome will affect 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 career progression of officers directly recruited into the forces.
