The Supreme Court had previously too held that Prakash Singh directions do not permit States to bypass the prescribed eligibility requirements merely because fewer eligible officers are available.
In February, the Supreme Court had further directed States facing similar disputes to follow the procedure it had laid down for DGP appointments.
It required the UPSC to make its final recommendations within the prescribed timeframe after receiving a revised proposal from the State.
In Odisha, the process is underway ahead of the retirement of incumbent DGP YB Khurania on August 31.
The State had initially sent three names before forwarding a wider panel of 11 senior IPS officers to the UPSC.
The Apex Court in February 2026 had reiterated that States must follow the procedure laid down in the judgment in Prakash Singh v Union of India for appointing their DGPs. The Court had directed that eligible officers be considered through a panel prepared by the UPSC, with the State then required to appoint the DGP from among the officers empanelled by the Commission.
Under the framework governing DGP appointments, the post of DGP in the apex level 17 is to be filled by selection from among officers holding DGP-level posts in level 16. The Supreme Court had previously too held that Prakash Singh directions do not permit States to bypass the prescribed eligibility requirements merely because fewer eligible officers are available.
In February, the Supreme Court had further directed States facing similar disputes to follow the procedure it had laid down for DGP appointments. It required the UPSC to make its final recommendations within the prescribed timeframe after receiving a revised proposal from the State.
In Odisha, the process is underway ahead of the retirement of incumbent DGP YB Khurania on August 31.
The State had initially sent three names before forwarding a wider panel of 11 senior IPS officers to the UPSC. The Commission was scheduled to meet on August 7 to shortlist three officers for the post.
