NEW DELHI, June 12 -- The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed an Allahabad high court order containing adverse remarks against Uttar Pradesh additional chief secretary (Home) Sanjay Prasad in a case of a missing child and referring the judgment to the Centre for assessing his suitability for future assignments to be decided by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC). A bench of Justice PK Mishra and Justice AS Chandurkar passed the order after the senior bureaucrat approached the top court against the June 3 order of the high court which observed that Prasad made a "deliberate and calculated attempt to undermine the authority of the court by not following the directions passed by the high court on police reforms. The top court issued notice on Prasad's plea and said, "Meanwhile, the directions issued by the high court shall remain stayed," while posting the matter after 10 weeks. The 1995-batch IAS officer was represented in court by additional solicitor general (ASG) KM Nataraj who informed the bench that the order was passed in a case of a missing minor girl from Jhansi. The girl has since been recovered, ASG informed, adding that the single judge has further directed its order to be transmitted to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) - the cadre-controlling authority of IAS officers for consideration of this judgment in assessing the officer's suitability for future assignments. The high court order said, "The Registrar (Compliance) of this court shall transmit a certified copy of the present order and the order passed by this Court in Subhash Chandra to the Secretary, DoPT, Government of India, being the cadre controlling authority of Shri Sanjay Prasad, IAS (DR 1995), for their record, reference, and such consideration as may be deemed appropriate in the context of the assessment of the said officer's suitability for future assignments by the ACC." While examining the missing girl's complaint, the high court referred to the Subhash Chandra judgment passed last year which dealt with a slew of reforms in the matter of police investigation and filing of charge sheets. In the case at hand, the court found serious discrepancies in compliance with this judgment. In February this year, Prasad filed an affidavit claiming that the state is contemplating an appeal against the Subhash Chandra decision in the top court. However, till the passing of the June 3 order, the court found no document indicating such a move by the state. The high court had held, "The conduct of Shri Sanjay Prasad, as noticed above, prima-facie reflects a deliberate and calculated attempt to undermine the authority of this court by projecting the proposed Special Leave Petition as a basis for seeking restraint in the enforcement of judicial directions." The high court further stated that it cannot be a "silent spectator" to such conduct. "Such conduct, if left unaddressed, would have the effect of rendering the orders of Constitutional courts nugatory at the hands of recalcitrant administrative officers and would set a pernicious precedent for the manner in which judicial directions concerning accountability and police reforms may be treated by the executive," it said. The high court went by the sequence of events to note that it raised legitimate concerns regarding the "apparent reluctance of the incumbent ACS (Home) to facilitate and effectively implement measures," having the potential to impede reforms intended to enhance transparency, professionalism, and accountability within the police machinery. It said that the directions issued in the Subhash Chandra case were a result of extensive consultative process involving the police establishment, the prosecution department, and the home department. Despite the same, the directions were not complied with for over a year, the high court observed....