New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday (September 4) took a dim view of Uttarakhand chief minister Pushkar Singh Dhami appointing a forest officer subject to departmental proceedings as director of the Rajaji Tiger Reserve despite senior officials’ apprehensions.
“The chief minister cannot take a decision like this … We are not in the feudal era when raja jaise bole waisa karein [what the king says must be done],” The Hindu quoted Justice B.R. Gavai as saying.
The court was hearing a case involving Dhami’s approval for posting an Indian Forest Service (IFoS) officer named Rahul as director of the Rajaji Tiger Reserve near Haridwar last month.
Uttarakhand forest minister Subodh Uniyal had amended a list of proposed IFoS transfers to include Rahul as Rajaji’s new director, but file notes routed through the state’s principal secretary (forests) and its chief secretary sought reconsideration.
They sought this “in view of the ongoing disciplinary proceedings against Rahul, the CBI probe and the case in the Supreme Court regarding illegal felling and construction work for Pakhro tiger safari inside Corbett [Tiger Reserve],” the Express‘s report said.
Rahul, under whose watch the illegal activities allegedly occurred, was removed as Corbett director in 2022.
After the bureaucrats routed the file notes, Uniyal forwarded a proposal to keep Rahul at his then-position of chief conservator of forests (monitoring, evaluation, IT and modernisation) and appoint a different officer as Rajaji director on July 24, the newspaper said.
But Dhami on August 8 decided to approve Rahul’s appointment as Rajaji director.
On Wednesday, Justice Gavai, who was accompanied in the three-judge bench hearing the case by Justices P.K. Mishra and K.V. Viswanathan, noted that Dhami had explained his decision in just one line.
“He had to give reasons when he is disagreeing. He is ignoring everything … It’s not a judgment, but he has to give reasoning as to why he disagrees with the bureaucrat, the minister,” the Express quoted him as saying.
According to reports, the case reached the Supreme Court following a report submitted by the Central Empowered Committee, a body that monitors the Supreme Court’s orders on forest and wildlife-related issues and reviews instances of non-compliance with these orders.
During the hearing, senior advocate Atmaram Nadkarni, who appeared for the Uttarakhand government, noted that neither the police, the CBI nor the Enforcement Directorate had indicted Rahul in the illegal tree felling case.
“Good officers should not be lost because of such things,” Nadkarni said according to The Hindu.
But Justice Gavai responded saying that “if there is nothing against him [Rahul], why [are] there departmental proceedings?”
“Departmental proceedings are not initiated unless there is a prima facie finding against an officer … And the chief minister has gone against the advice of everyone in this case.”
Uniyal has maintained that the decision was taken “unanimously” following his and Dhami’s consent.
While the court considered asking Dhami to file an affidavit, it closed proceedings because Rahul’s appointment was revoked on Tuesday, reports said.
