Tamil Nadu Names New Acting Police Chief Amid Political Controversy Over Seniority Protocol

Tamil Nadu appoints G Venkataraman as acting DGP, sparking BJP criticism over bypassed senior officers and allegations of weakening police force amid Chennai's poor women safety rankings.
The Tamil Nadu government has appointed senior IPS officer G Venkataraman as the state's acting Director General of Police and Head of Police Force, triggering significant political controversy over the selection process and its implications for police administration.
Venkataraman assumed his new role on Sunday following the retirement of Shankar Jiwal, a 1990 batch IPS officer who completed his tenure and subsequently received appointment as Chairman of the newly established Tamil Nadu Fire Commission, effective September 1. The transition ceremony took place at the DGP office, where Jiwal formally handed over responsibilities to his successor.
Former BJP state president K Annamalai has strongly criticized the appointment, characterizing it as legally questionable and potentially damaging to police force morale. Annamalai highlighted that the government bypassed six senior IPS officers to select Venkataraman, creating what he described as unnecessary hierarchical disruption within the police establishment.
The six officers who were overlooked include Seema Agarwal, Sandeep Rai Rathore, Abhay Kumar Singh, Vanniyaperumal, Rajeev Kumar, and Pramod Kumar, all of whom held seniority over the newly appointed acting DGP. Annamalai argued that this decision would create internal friction and compromise the effectiveness of police operations across the state.
According to Annamalai's statements, the appointment ceremony witnessed significant tension, with six senior officers and two junior officers allegedly boycotting the event in protest. He contended that such internal divisions would undermine law enforcement capabilities at a time when public safety concerns require unified police leadership.
The BJP leader reinforced his criticism by referencing the NARI 2025 report on women's safety, which ranked Chennai 21st among 31 major Indian cities. The report indicated that only 6 percent of women in Chennai feel completely safe, while 46 percent feel moderately safe and 48 percent express feelings of insecurity. Annamalai argued that these statistics demonstrate existing law enforcement challenges that could be exacerbated by internal police force disruptions.
Annamalai has demanded adherence to established protocols, calling for the state government to submit a panel of five candidates to the Union Public Service Commission for proper DGP selection. He insisted that appointments should follow constitutional procedures requiring UPSC recommendations rather than direct state government selections.
The controversy extends beyond individual appointments to broader questions about police administration and state-federal coordination in law enforcement appointments. The dispute highlights ongoing tensions between state autonomy in administrative decisions and central government oversight mechanisms designed to ensure systematic selection processes.
In related administrative changes, the government appointed Vinit Dev Wankhede, currently serving as DGP Headquarters, as Chairman and Managing Director of Tamil Nadu Police Housing Corporation Limited in Chennai. This appointment fills the position vacated by Shailesh Kumar Yadav following his retirement from service.
The timing of these appointments coincides with broader discussions about police reform and administrative efficiency in Tamil Nadu. The controversy surrounding Venkataraman's selection reflects deeper institutional challenges regarding merit-based appointments and maintaining hierarchical order within state police forces.
The situation underscores the complex intersection of political considerations, administrative procedures, and law enforcement effectiveness in state governance. The resolution of this controversy will likely influence future police appointments and may prompt discussions about standardizing selection processes across different states to minimize political interference in police administration.




















