At the CAPF Contempt hearing, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan told the Supreme Court that the newly notified CAPF Act cannot be used as a shield for a cadre review that, on the petitioners’ case, has not even begun.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday, October 15, resumed hearing the CAPF contempt case over continued deputation of Indian Police Service (IPS) officers to the Central Armed Police Forces, with the officers’ counsel arguing that the Central Armed Police Forces (General Administration) Act, 2026, notified on October 8, cannot excuse non-compliance with the Court’s 2025 directions [Mahendra Singh Deo and Others v. Govind Mohan and Others].
The matter was heard by a Special Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, which has the contempt petitions listed together with the writ petitions challenging the validity of the new Act.
How the case reached here
In Sanjay Prakash and Others v. Union of India, decided on May 23, 2025, a Bench of Justice A.S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan held that Group A officers of the CAPFs form organised services. The Court directed that IPS deputation to posts up to the rank of Inspector General be progressively reduced over about two years, and ordered a cadre review and a review of the service and recruitment rules within six months. The Union’s review petition against that judgment was dismissed in October 2025. Retired and serving CAPF officers then moved contempt petitions against Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan, alleging non-implementation, including through fresh IPS deputations.
Parliament passed the CAPF (General Administration) Act in April 2026, and the Centre brought it into force from October 8, 2026. The Act reserves 50 per cent of Inspector General posts and at least 67 per cent of Additional Director General posts for IPS officers on deputation, and keeps Special Director General and Director General posts for deputationists. The Centre’s position is that the Act expressly empowers it to prescribe recruitment, including by deputation. Cadre officers have challenged the Act’s validity, contending that it undoes the 2025 judgment.
ALSO READ: Centre Notifies CAPF Act 2026 Amid Pending Supreme Court Challenge By Cadre Officers
On September 30, after the contempt case had been dropped from the cause list and moved on a mention before the Chief Justice of India, the Special Bench clubbed it with Writ Petitions 873, 977 and 908 of 2026. The Bench said it would examine on the next date whether any of the 2025 directions were independent of the Act and, if so, whether they had been complied with, and fixed October 15 at the Solicitor General’s request.
Divan: contempt can be heard on its own
Opening for the petitioners, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan addressed whether the contempt could be taken up independently of the challenge to the Act. He pointed out that the Act relied on in the proceedings was notified only on October 8.
Divan took the Bench through the 2025 judgment’s discussion of the forces’ security functions, the Government’s policy on IPS deputation and the promotional stagnation faced by cadre officers. When Justice Manoj Misra asked about appointments to higher posts under the existing service rules, Divan read out the judgment’s directions for a cadre review and a review of the service and recruitment rules within six months.
“How can the Act be a shield?”
Divan told the Court that the review petition against the judgment was dismissed on October 28, 2025. Referring to a compliance report dated October 13, 2026, he said the cadre review was due by November 23, 2025, and questioned how an Act notified on October 8, 2026 could serve as a shield for that default.
He submitted that no provision of the Act prohibits a cadre review. The petitioners’ case, he said, is that the review exercise has not even been initiated, and that the separate direction to review the service and recruitment rules also remains uncomplied with.
These are the petitioners’ submissions. The Union has maintained in earlier hearings that the contempt case cannot be separated from the challenge to the Act, and the Home Secretary has said in an affidavit that the cadre review process was started in all five forces. The Court has recorded no finding on contempt.
What comes next
The Union’s reply on Thursday and any order passed at the end of the hearing were not available at the time of writing. The returnable date in the writ petitions challenging the CAPF Act remains November 18, 2026.
Case Title: Mahendra Singh Deo and Others v. Govind Mohan and Others
Case Number: Contempt Petition (C) No. 37 of 2026 in C.A. No. 13106 of 2024, with W.P. Nos. 873, 977 and 908 of 2026
Bench: Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan (Special Bench), Supreme Court of India
Date of Hearing: October 15, 2026
Appearances: Senior Advocate Shyam Divan for the petitioners; others not available.