Gehlot alleged that once the Union Public Service Commission and the central government cleared the names, there was no justification for the state government to hold back appointments. In a public post, he said prioritising “favoured faces or political influence instead of merit and transparency” undermines rules and raises doubts about impartiality. He urged the government to end the deadlock and issue appointments immediately.

The controversy intensified because one of the shortlisted officers, Ajay Kumar Arya, is related by marriage to Union minister Arjun Ram Meghwal, prompting speculation about political sensitivities. Interviews for 20 candidates were conducted by the UPSC in December for four available posts, after which the recommended names were forwarded to the Department of Personnel and Training for final clearance.

Responding to Gehlot, senior BJP leader Rajendra Singh Rathore dismissed the allegations as baseless and challenged him to present documentary proof to the chief minister if he had evidence. Rathore said the former chief minister’s public remarks lacked logic and were politically motivated.

Under existing rules, about 15 percent of IAS positions in a state can be filled by promoting officers from other state services. The selection involves scrutiny by a state screening committee led by the chief secretary, followed by interviews conducted by UPSC board members along with state representatives. Final recommendations are sent to the Centre before appointments are issued.

The promotion route has previously faced legal hurdles. In 2023, the Rajasthan High Court temporarily stayed such promotions while hearing a petition challenging the process. The decision was later overturned by the Supreme Court of India, which upheld the system and imposed costs on the petitioner, effectively clearing the legal path for selections from non-state administrative cadres.

Retired IAS officers say that once the Centre forwards approved names, state governments typically formalise appointments without delay unless procedural objections exist. The present pause, they note, risks fuelling speculation and affecting morale within services.

With assembly elections approaching next year, the issue has quickly taken on political overtones. Whether the state government issues the pending promotion orders soon could determine if the dispute fades as a procedural delay or escalates into a broader governance debate.