In a much relief to the Indian Forest Service (IFS) officers in a Madhya Pradesh, the Supreme Court has directed the Madhya Pradesh government to withdraw a controversial order that had Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers to evaluate the annual performance of IFS officers.
The apex court has warned the state that it would be held in contempt if the order is not withdrawn.
This order dated June 29, 2024 had created a stir with the state bureaucracy and the IFS association had challenged the order. However, in states like Rajasthan, Karnataka and Maharashtra, IFS officers are being evaluated by IAS officers and there is no visible protest from IFS officers.
The matter came before the Supreme Court following a petition filed by Gaurav Kumar Bansal, who argued that the government's order undermined the core mandate of forest officers.
What was the order?
The MP government has issued directions that district magistrates and divisional commissioners would have a say in the appraisals of IFS officers serving in districts. Tasks related to forest management, the Forest Rights Act, land acquisition, ecotourism, mining activities in forest areas performed by IFS officers serving as divisional forest officer, conservator of forests, and chief conservator of forests, were to be evaluated by the district collector and divisional commissioner, according to the state government's order.
Also as per the order, senior officers like Conservator of Forests and Chief Conservator of Forests posted in the District will be assessed by District Collector/Commissioner, who are generally officers of much junior pay scale.
IFS Association protested against the order
Soon after the order was issued, IFS officers were up in arms against it arguing that the order diluted their authority, raised questions of conflict of interest, contravened a Supreme Court judgment, endangered forest conservation, and dampened their morale.
The association also said the order was in contravention of a 1995 Supreme Court judgment, which stated that “up to the officer of the rank of Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, the reporting authority has to be the immediately superior officer within the Forest Department”.
“In the case of the principal chief conservator of forests, who has no superior authority within the service, reporting authority can be outside of the forest department,” the judgement said.
The BuckStopper, run by a group of seasoned journalists, holds the powerful accountable. The buck stops with them, as they cannot shrug off their official responsibilities.
