The Supreme Court on Wednesday said the head of the government cannot be expected to be an “old-era king” and we are not in the “feudal era” and questioned Uttarakhand Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami's appointment An IFS official acted as director of the Rajaji Tiger Reserve, ignoring the opinions of the state forest minister and others.
However, the state government told a bench headed by Justice BR Gavai that the order appointing Indian Forest Service (IFS) officials as tiger reserve directors had been withdrawn on September 3.
The bench, which also included Justices PK Mishra and KV Viswanathan, was hearing the matter regarding the appointment of IFS officer Rahul (former director of Corbett Tiger Reserve) as director of Rajaji Tiger Reserve.
The court noted that the deputy secretary, chief secretary and the state forest minister all agreed that there were clear instructions from the first officer that Rahul should not be the director of the Rajaji Tiger Reserve.
“There is something like the principle of public trust in this country. The executive head cannot be expected to be the king of the past and whatever they say, they will do,” the judges observed, adding, “We are not in the feudal era.” Chief Minister Why should there be special affection for him (the official)?” the bench asked, adding: “Just because he is the chief minister, can he do anything?” It also noted that departmental proceedings were filed against the officials concerned. Under review.
The court noted that the notification stated that the officer should not be posted in the Rajaji Tiger Reserve, but the chief minister “simply ignored it”.
“If the responsible officer, deputy secretary, principal secretary, minister directly disagrees, then at least some consideration should be given to why he disagrees with the proposal,” the report states.
Senior advocate ANS Nadkarni, appearing for the state, said the officer was not facing any FIR lodged by the state police, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
Lawyers said the disciplinary action against the officer related to the Corbett Tiger Reserve, where several officers were issued show-cause notices.
“He is a good officer. In fact, others are targeting him,” Nadkarni said, adding, “You can't sacrifice a good officer who doesn't have any confrontation. “If there is nothing, then why are you targeting him? He filed a departmental lawsuit? ” the court asked the counsel, adding that the department does not initiate proceedings against anyone unless there is some prima facie evidence.
“The chief minister went against everyone's advice,” it commented.
Nadkarni said the police, investigative agencies such as the CBI and ED, as well as the Central Empowerment Commission (CEC) had not blamed the officer.
“The only thing going against him is the disciplinary process, issuing charge sheets to everyone (the other officers),” he said.
“Unless he is exonerated in departmental proceedings, you cannot issue him a certificate of good police officer,” the bench said. During the hearing, the bench also referred to a newspaper report that said the Uttarakhand forest minister and The chief secretary opposed the appointment of the officer as director of the Rajaji Tiger Reserve.
“You gave the impression that the newspaper's report was incorrect. When we see this statement, the newspaper's report was not wrong. The newspaper's report was factually correct,” the judge observed.
“Newspaper reports said that both the chief secretary and the forest minister were opposed and despite the objections, the chief minister vetoed it. So there is nothing wrong with the report,” it said.
The bench noted that Nadkarni had placed on record a copy of the state government's September 3 order quashing the order appointing Rahul as the field director of the Rajaji Tiger Reserve.
“From this point of view, there is no need to issue an order. The proceedings are over,” the Supreme Court said.
(This report has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from United News Agency-PTI)
