Back
, took effect on , with the issuing a formal notification, even as its remains under active challenge before the . A bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan is scheduled to hear a clutch of petitions—including —against the law on .
The new legislation provides a unified statutory framework for recruitment, promotion, and service conditions of Group-A general duty officers in five paramilitary forces: the , , , and . Its enforcement comes nearly five months after Parliament passed the bill in .
Law Takes Effect Amid Legal Uncertainty
The notification, issued under , appointed as the date on which all provisions would come into force. The government has defended the law as necessary to replace fragmented regulatory provisions that have led to repeated litigation over service matters.
However, serving and retired CAPF officers have petitioned the Supreme Court, arguing that the Act perpetuates a system that restricts their career progression by reserving senior leadership positions for Indian Police Service officers brought in on . Among the lead petitioners is CRPF Assistant Commandant Bibhor Kumar Singh, a Shaurya Chakra awardee who lost both legs in an anti-Maoist operation in 2022.
The government, in an filed before the apex court, maintained that the Act “expressly empowers” the central government to prescribe methods of recruitment, including , and that appointments of Group-A general duty officers are now governed by the legislation.
The Disputed Quotas
Under the new law, 50 per cent of Inspector General-level posts must be filled through IPS , while at least 67 per cent of Additional Director General-level positions are earmarked for officers on . Posts at the ranks of Special Director General and Director General are to be filled exclusively through .
These quotas directly conflict with the Supreme Court’s judgment in , which held that CAPF personnel are entitled to promotion to Group A posts and that IPS up to the rank of Inspector General should be “progressively reduced” over two years to provide more opportunities to cadre officers. The court had warned that delayed promotions could adversely affect the morale of the forces.
In , the apex court dismissed the Centre’s against that judgment, leaving the directions intact.
Background: The 2025 Supreme Court Judgment
The bench, comprising Justices A.S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, had ruled that Group A officers of the CAPFs constitute “” for all purposes. It directed the government to undertake a within six months and to progressively reduce the number of senior-level posts reserved for IPS .
The judgment recognised that CAPF cadre officers had been denied fair promotional avenues, leading to institutional demoralisation. The court’s observations prompted contempt petitions from retired officers after the government continued to induct IPS officers on even after the verdict.
and Procedural Twists
The contempt petitions, alleging non-implementation of the 2025 judgment, were originally before a bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S. Chandurkar, while the constitutional challenge to the CAPF Act was before a different bench. In an unusual development, the Supreme Court Registry struck off the contempt matter from the cause list on despite a judicial direction to list it. The bench sought an explanation, and the matter was re-listed the next day.
On , the Chief Justice of India constituted a combined bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan to hear both the contempt petitions and the together, after counsel for the respondents requested a single bench. The order noted that one of the defences raised in the concerned the notification of the CAPF Act, whose validity was being separately challenged.
During the hearing, the Solicitor General sought two weeks to study the issue. The bench directed that the contempt petitions and be listed together at 2 p.m. on .
What Happens Next
With the Act now in force, the central government has begun implementing its provisions, including quotas that directly contravene the 2025 judgment. The hearing will test whether the Supreme Court will allow the to proceed independently or defer them pending the outcome of the constitutional challenge.
The , which represents serving and retired personnel, has said the cadre dispute affects around 13,000 CAPF officers. The outcome of the hearing will determine not only the fate of the new law but also the career prospects of thousands of officers who have spent decades serving in the forces responsible for internal and border security.
