Telangana HC seeks explanation for IPS officers holding IAS posts
The Telangana High Court has issued notices to the Chief Secretary after a petition challenged the State’s decision to grant IAS-equivalent status to IPS officers. The court sought an explanation for IPS officers holding IAS cadre posts and adjourned the matter to December 10
Hyderabad: Justice Surepalli Nanda of the Telangana High Court on Monday issued notices to the Chief Secretary, seeking an explanation on why several senior IPS officers are continuing in IAS cadre posts. The notices were issued in a petition filed by Vadla Srikanth, who challenged the State government’s decision to grant IAS-equivalent status to IPS officers under GO Rt. No. 1342 dated September 26.
Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Vijay Gopal argued that the appointment of IPS officers to posts earmarked for the IAS violates the Indian Administrative Service (Cadre) Rules, 1954, and the IAS (Fixation of Cadre Strength) Amendment Regulations, 2016. He sought a writ of quo warranto declaring the appointments illegal and directing the State to remove these officers from IAS-designated positions.
According to the petition, several IPS officers are currently holding key IAS cadre posts. These include Stephen Ravindra, Commissioner of Civil Supplies and Ex-Officio Principal Secretary; Shikha Goel, Director General, Vigilance and Enforcement, and Ex-Officio Principal Secretary, GAD; and CV Anand, who has been functioning as Special Chief Secretary, Home Department.
The counsel submitted that Principal Secretary posts are exclusively meant for IAS officers, as these roles carry administrative oversight over decisions taken by various departments, including those handled by IPS officers. The petitioner also stressed that IAS and IPS officers undergo different training, with clearly demarcated responsibilities under service rules, and said that bypassing these norms distorts the cadre structure.
Representing the State, Special Government Pleader Rahul Reddy sought time to file a detailed counter-affidavit. The court accepted the request and adjourned the matter to December 10.
