Surat Airport Row: CISF Cap Worn by Director Sparks Protocol Questions

SURAT : Independence Day celebrations at Surat International Airport have been overshadowed by an unusual protocol controversy after Airport Director Anand Narayan Sharma was seen wearing a cap bearing the CISF insignia while addressing the gathering. The image has prompted questions over who authorised the civilian airport official to wear the security force’s headgear and who provided it.

Photographs and a video from the August 15 programme show Sharma delivering his Independence Day address wearing the CISF-style cap, while a CISF officer is seen standing beside him.

The controversy is not about the cordial coordination between the Airports Authority of India (AAI) and the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), which provides security at airports. The question is whether official CISF headgear can be worn by a civilian airport administrator during a ceremonial function.

The CISF is a Central Armed Police Force under the Ministry of Home Affairs, which lists the force among the CAPFs and maintains the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001.

CISF’s official website also identifies the force as responsible for security at airports and other critical installations.

“This is not about questioning the spirit of Independence Day or the relationship between AAI and CISF. It is about whether the use of official force insignia by a civilian was authorised,” observers said.

The key questions now are: Who handed over the cap? Was permission obtained from the competent CISF authority? Was the Airport Director authorised by AAI to wear it? And does any written protocol permit civilians to wear CISF headgear during official ceremonies?

The Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 provide the statutory framework governing the force and its personnel.

Officials from AAI and CISF have not been quoted here as confirming any specific authorisation for the cap.

At an airport, where security, discipline and clearly defined institutional roles are critical, even a ceremonial gesture can raise legitimate protocol questions.

A simple clarification from AAI and CISF could settle the controversy: was the cap authorised, who approved it, and under what rule?