The debate over the yet-to-be-presented bill on so-called administrative reforms in Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), in the public domain, is largely confined to the issue of promotional prospects for cadre officers of these forces. Or it is framed as a power struggle between CAPF and Indian Police Service (IPS) cadres. This, however, is far from the truth.
The debate has pushed into the background the significance of the Supreme Court order directing the government to implement its own policy by granting cadre officers of these five Central Police and Military Forces (CPMFs)—Border Security Force (BSF), Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) and Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB)—their due by according them the status of “Organised Group A Service (OGAS)” and all its allied benefits.
For common understanding, the most important element of being an organised service is that all vacancies up to the rank of Joint Secretary (Inspector General in the case of CPMFs) should be filled through promotion from within the cadre of that organisation.
Another key element is that these organised services receive the benefit of what is termed Non-Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU), a scheme introduced in 2009 to address the grievances of services facing acute stagnation due to their pyramidal structure.
Stagnation as Structural Injustice
That the CPMF cadres face acute stagnation is borne by the fact that an officer of CRPF who joined in 2011 still has not got his first promotion and therefore suffers a double jeopardy—neither promotion nor financial progression. By contrast, their counterparts in other services have received at least three financial upgradations.
It is important to note that out of 62 organised services in India, 57 have been granted all benefits, leaving only these five CPMFs out of the ambit of being accorded classic organised service status.
The following chart is an indicator of the acute stagnation being faced in BSF. The situation in the other four CPMF is more or less the same, if not worse.
The Missing Piece: Financial Parity Through NFFU
The crux of the Supreme Court order is to grant classic organised service status to these five CPMF, i.e., ensuring that all vacancies up to the rank of Inspector General are filled through promotion of cadre officers. Currently, a large percentage of posts above DIG are reserved for IPS officers, limiting such progression.
However, it must also be acknowledged that universal promotion to top ranks is structurally impossible due to the steep, pyramidal design necessitated by the operational nature of these forces.
The most important aspect of the Supreme Court order, which will benefit every officer in these cadres, is that it will make them eligible for grant of NFFU, thereby addressing financial hardship and removing the double jeopardy they currently face.
Reform or Regression? What the Proposed Bill Risks
The proposed bill aims to undo what has been ordered by the Supreme Court after a long legal battle of almost 17 years, in which the courts have always ruled in the favour of cadre officers. Yet, the government has repeatedly declined to implement those orders.
This perhaps is due to the fact that the cadre officers, not reaching top decision-making levels, lack access to the political executive and lawmakers. Their voices are often filtered through IPS leadership that heads these organisations.
By getting diverted to a presumed contest between IPS and cadre officers, the debate misses a very important aspect of the impact on national security by this endeavour to overturn the well nuanced order of the Supreme Court—directing the government to honour its own policy and recognise these cadres as Organised Group A Services—risks weakening institutions that are central to India’s security architecture, from border management to internal security.
Evolved Forces, Outdated Leadership Structures
For decades, officers of the CAPFs have worked within a leadership structure where large percentage of senior positions are held by officers from the IPS. This arrangement largely functioned through professional cooperation and a shared commitment to national security.
Over time, however, CAPFs have expanded enormously in both scale and responsibility, from border management to counter-insurgency to internal security operations across the country. The personnel of these forces, including the cadre officers, have gained lot of expertise in their own operational domain.
These forces have evolved into large and complex security organisations. Alongside expansion, the internal cadre leadership has also matured, bringing with it a deep operational experience and institutional insight. Having risen from the grassroots, these officers possess deep insights into operational, logistical, and human resource challenges—whether in border management or internal security. Over time, they have developed a strategic culture and are well-equipped to engage with policy-level concerns within their specific operational domain.
When these forces were being raised, many IPS officers, who had joined these forces at ground level, obtained first-hand experience of the ground level realities of these forces, be they operational, logistics, or human resources. But the IPS officers are now deputed to these forces only at higher levels, and have no connect with the ground level issues.
Not being familiar with the operational environment and ethos, they tend to focus on non-core issues and resort to stop gap arrangements which leaves the under command confused. The effects of this temporary leadership are visible across areas—from technology acquisition to infrastructure planning and personnel management. The result is reflected in rising voluntary retirements, workplace dissatisfaction, and an increasing number of legal disputes.
Organisational evolution always follow a maturity curve. As institutions grow in scale, experience, and operational depth, their internal structures are reviewed with an aim to improve the delivery of the objectives for which they were originally raised.
The Supreme Court’s recognition of OGAS for CAPF cadres, after years of legal contestation, was a step towards this evolution and should have provided legal finality to the issue, leaving no scope for further debate. However, the proposed legislative CAPF Bill, 2026 risks creating the opposite effect. Instead of strengthening institutional growth, it may dampen morale and introduce avoidable divisions within a system that has long functioned on cooperation.
The real challenge before the government at this juncture is to ensure that CAPFs' cadre structures evolve alongside organisational maturity, enabling the forces to deliver their mandates with greater clarity, continuity of expertise, and operational effectiveness. A bill drafted without internal study of concerned forces, or consultation with stakeholders on the issues involved cannot be expected to address their existing challenges.
Despite being presented under the broad banner of "reforms", its narrow focus—primarily on officers’ cadre of and above the rank of Inspector general—reveals a limited and predetermined intent.
Notably, the bill is silent on the major issues of these forces, the prominent one the denial of OGAS status to these five forces, despite clear judicial direction.
This bill diminishes all CAPF personnel, not just officers. It is a sabotage to the morale and pride of CAPFs, making it a Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and IPS-owned force, rather than recognising them as independent armed forces of India. Introducing such a bill, therefore, is a grave mistake.
What CAPF cadres are asking for is not privilege but parity, through grant of OGAS and NFFU. Why should these five forces be deprived of this, when 57 other services are receiving the benefits? Denial of the same raises concerns under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, and undermines the principle of equal treatment.
The Cost of Being the ‘Good Actor’
Even in nature, the ultimate role of a parent is to enable the offspring to take flight, not to hold on to them indefinitely. The CAPFs' cadres are no longer children, they are seasoned, professional forces with years of operational experience.
Seeking greater strategic space and leadership is not defiance; it is a natural progression. They must be recognised for what they have become—mature and evolved institutions.
For years, cadre officers have functioned within the existing framework for the much needed institutional stability and growth. They chose national security interests above institutional debate, acting as the "good actors,"—the proverbial “samajhdaars” within the system.
This entire episode raises a pertinent and important question: Is this the enduring price of being the “good actor” within the system?
(Sanjiv Krishan Sood (Retd) has served as the Additional Director General of the BSF and was also with the SPG. He tweets @sood_2. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)