New Delhi: Amid controversy around the extension of his tenure as Nagaland director general of police (DGP), top cop T. John Longkumer put in his papers Monday. His resignation came a week before a final Supreme Court hearing on the process of his appointment.
The apex court had earlier pulled up the Nagaland government for extending Longkumer’s tenure for six months even though he was due to retire on 31 August last year.
Longkumer’s extension was to end on 28 February 2023, but ThePrint has learnt that the 1991-batch Indian Police Service (IPS) officer stepped down earlier since the state government has to appoint a new DGP before the Nagaland assembly elections, expected to be held in March. Traditionally, any officer holding the position of DGP when the elections start continues until they end.
Since the 2018 state elections, a Nationalist Democratic Progressive Party (NDPP)-Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) alliance has been in power in Nagaland.
With Longkumer resigning, Rupin Sharma, a 1992-batch officer of Nagaland cadre, has emerged as a strong contender for the post.
Significantly, Sharma had been appointed as the Nagaland DGP in November 2017, but was removed from the post within seven months, even as the state government faced allegations of seeking to replace him with a “yes man”.
A junior officer of the 1998 batch, Renchamo P Kikon, was briefly made an interim DGP until Longkumer, whose home state is Nagaland, was brought in on interstate deputation in June 2018 from Chhattisgarh.
When Longkumer’s three-year deputation ended in June 2021, his service was extended by one year until August 2022, which is when he was due to retire. However, he received another six-month extension.
This led to controversy since it went against the UPSC’s recommendations regarding the appointment of the Nagaland DGP.
Back in March last year, the Nagaland government had sent the UPSC a list of three eligible candidates for the post of DGP — T. John Longkumer, Renchamo P. Kikon, and Rupin Sharma. The UPSC had thereafter rejected Longkumer because he was due for superannuation and also turned down Kikon’s name since he lacked sufficient seniority for the position.
The UPSC, however, had approved Sharma’s name and told the state that he was the only choice as DGP.
Despite this, the state government extended Longkumer’s tenure for six months, and the MHA approved the decision.
Thereafter, the Nagaland Law Students’ Federation, a local organisation of law students, petitioned the Supreme Court. In an order last month, the top court asked the Nagaland government, UPSC, and MHA to complete all formalities and take a final decision by 19 December, but this is yet to be done.
Speaking to ThePrint, Naresh Kaushik, special counsel of UPSC, said more time had been granted to take the decision.
“We have time till 9 January, as granted by the court to us, to take the final decision and give the name for the appointment of the DGP,” he said.
Alemtemshi Jamir, former chief secretary and the working president of NDPP, part of the ruling coalition, said: “The government is trying to find a way out of it. We do not have enough senior officers who are eligible for the position. The government is weighing options.”
Meanwhile, IPS and Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers that ThePrint spoke to pointed at “bias” on the part of the Nagaland government when appointing senior officers.
“[Longkumer] served in the position for four years and got an extension, which is technically wrong,” said a senior Nagaland-cadre IAS officer. “But the government prefers Naga officers here,” he alleged.
Also read: 28 posts, 78 DGs & ADGs in UP — why experts are calling top-heavy IPS ‘worst-managed cadre’
Nine-month-long stalemate
The standard procedure is that a DGP is generally appointed after a consultation between the UPSC and the state government. In the case of Nagaland, the back-and-forth between the two has been going on since March 2022.
According to a 17 October Supreme Court order, the Nagaland government had initially sent the names of three officers along with relevant records for appointment of the DGP to the UPSC. In its response in April, as mentioned earlier, the UPSC rejected the names of Longkumer and Kikon since the former was due to retire in August and the latter was yet to complete 30 years of service.
The UPSC also pointed out that the Nagaland government’s list had omitted the name of Sunil Achaya, who was at “serial number 1 in the seniority list of IPS officers of Nagaland cadre”. His name, the UPSC said, should have been included in the eligibility list.
While these communications were continuing between the Nagaland government and the UPSC, Achaya is learnt to have expressed his unwillingness to return to his cadre.
Nevertheless, after the SC’s 17 October order — in which it asked to be given new list of names for the DGP post — the state government included Achaya in its new list (along with Rupin Sharma).
In its 9 December order, the court pointed out: “It appears that the Union Ministry of Home Affairs has indicated that A Sunil Achaya, who is on central deputation, does not wish to be considered for the appointment.”
When asked about the next DGP, NDPP working president Alemtemshi Jamir claimed that the government was currently in a bind. “There are no options, as one of two recommended officers expressed his unwillingness to return to his cadre,” he said, adding that attempts were on to find a solution.
Kaushik, the UPSC’s counsel, however added that the court has ruled out such issues as preventing an appointment. “The court said that if the state had one officer, that officer can be appointed.”
Allegations of ‘discrimination’
Even as the issue of the appointment of DGP in the state remains unresolved, senior IPS officers of the Nagaland cadre allege that the government has been “discriminatory” towards non-Naga officers in terms of promotions and postings.
“Since 1989, when the Nagaland cadre was formed, to 2001, at least 13 out of the total 16 officers either resigned or went on central deputation. One of them was killed by insurgents. The officers on deputation never came back to the state,” said a senior IPS officer of Nagaland cadre, now serving at on central deputation
“The state government is still biased against non-Naga officers who are still in the state and did not get the cadre changed or sought central deputation. This is clear discrimination against the officers who are not from Nagaland,” he added.
A second senior officer said that he was part of a group of officers that had petitioned the state government in 2017 to about alleged discrimination against non-Naga IPS officers. He added that the MHA had written to the state government in April that year seeking its intervention, but the situation has not improved.
“We raised several issues, including about promotions and field postings. However, nothing has changed yet,” he added.
(Edited by Asavari Singh)
Also read: Rajender Singh, Delhi supercop who caught ‘superthief’ Bunty, on his greatest hits & a few misses