Karnataka DGP M.A. Saleem Ends Colonial-Era Orderly System, Redeploys 3,000 Police Personnel to Core Law Enforcement Duties
In a decisive step aimed at dismantling the long-criticized orderly system, Karnataka Director General of Police (DGP) M.A. Saleem (IPS:1993:KN) has issued a directive mandating the withdrawal of all police personnel currently serving as orderlies at the homes of senior officers. This order seeks to reassign these personnel to frontline policing responsibilities, a move that will restore nearly 3,000 officers to their primary law enforcement roles.
The directive has been widely welcomed both within the police force and by external observers. However, skepticism persists among some quarters, as previous attempts to abolish the practice have not always resulted in lasting change.
Redeployment of 3,000 Police Personnel
According to the latest instructions from the Karnataka DGP, police constables and staff presently engaged in household or personal duties at officers’ residences will be reassigned to operational policing tasks.
Estimates suggest that approximately 3,000 personnel are currently performing such non-policing roles. Their redeployment is expected to significantly enhance manpower availability for field operations, thereby strengthening law enforcement capacity across the state.
This move directly addresses longstanding concerns that valuable police resources have been diverted away from their intended purpose of maintaining law and order.
Origins of the Orderly System
The orderly system traces its roots back to the British colonial era, when constables were assigned to senior officers to carry out domestic chores and personal errands.
Despite India’s independence and the evolution of modern policing standards, the practice continued in several states, drawing sharp criticism for being incompatible with democratic governance and professional policing norms.
Critics have consistently argued that assigning trained police personnel to household duties diminishes the dignity of the force and undermines the efficiency of law enforcement.
Official Ban in 2017 but Limited Effect
The orderly system was formally banned in 2017 following widespread criticism and protests from within the police community.
Yet, the ban’s impact was limited. Once public attention subsided, reports indicated that many personnel quietly resumed their roles at officers’ residences, allowing the system to persist informally despite its official prohibition.
A Nationwide Concern
The issue is not confined to Karnataka. The orderly system has been reported across multiple states, making it a nationwide challenge in police administration.
The National Police Commission had recommended abolishing the practice decades ago, warning that it demoralizes lower-ranking personnel and diverts critical resources away from policing.
Judicial bodies have also repeatedly criticized the system, underscoring its incompatibility with constitutional and professional standards.
Judicial and Political Opposition
Indian courts have taken a firm stance against the orderly system. The Madras High Court once described it as a form of “colonial slavery,” emphasizing its inconsistency with democratic governance.
Political leaders have echoed similar sentiments. Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, for instance, condemned the practice as a violation of human rights and likened it to modern-day slavery.
Reform Efforts in Other States
Several states have attempted to introduce reforms to eliminate the system:
Tamil Nadu established district-level monitoring committees headed by district collectors to ensure compliance with the ban.
Telangana integrated the withdrawal of orderlies into broader police modernization and reform initiatives.
These measures aim to ensure that police personnel are utilized exclusively for their intended purpose—maintaining public order and serving citizens.
Resistance and Challenges
Despite repeated reform efforts, resistance has often slowed progress. Analysts note that a strong lobby among senior officers has sometimes diluted or delayed implementation.
As a result, critics argue that the success of Karnataka’s latest directive will depend heavily on strict monitoring, consistent enforcement, and unwavering administrative commitment.
Skepticism Over Implementation
While the order has garnered support from various quarters, many within the policing community remain cautious.
Past experiences demonstrate that similar directives have not always led to permanent change. Ensuring the complete withdrawal of orderlies and their redeployment to policing duties will require sustained oversight and a zero-tolerance approach to violations.
