NEW DELHI, Sept 4: The Supreme Court on Wednesday orally slammed the Uttarakhand chief minister Pushkar Singh Dhami for defying objections from the State bureaucracy and his own Minister against the transfer of an officer who is facing departmental and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) proceedings as the Director of the ecologically sensitive Rajaji Tiger Reserve.
A three-judge Bench headed by Justice B.R. Gavai commented, “this is not a “feudal era” when what the king said had to be done” after the bench was informed by the amicus curiae, senior advocate K. Parameshwar, of multiple reports, including that of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), red-flagging the appointment of Indian Forest Service officer Rahul as the Director of the Rajaji Tiger Reserve.
The CEC report in the Supreme Court said Mr Rahul’s transfer to the Rajaji Tiger Reserve came through even as his role in the illegal felling of trees and unauthorised constructions at the Corbett Tiger Reserve, while he was Director there, was under the lens. Both the Corbett and Rajaji reserves are part of the Shivalik tiger landscape and important wildlife conservation areas. The CEC had swung into action on a complaint filed by advocate Abhijay Negi about Mr Rahul’s transfer order.
Mr Parameshwar informed the court that Mr Rahul’s transfer to the Rajaji Tiger Reserve was cleared despite specific file notings from the State bureaucracy objecting to the move. The bureaucracy’s objections were endorsed by the State Forest Minister. The Civil Services Board of Uttarakhand had not recommended the officer’s transfer to the Rajaji Tiger Reserve. The transfer had overruled all these objections.
“The Chief Minister cannot take a decision like this… We are not in the feudal era when raja jaise bole waise kare (what the king says must be done). When every subordinate authority, from the desk officer to the Deputy Secretary to the Principal Secretary of Forests and the Minister brings to the notice of the Chief Minister that for ‘a’, ‘b’, ‘c’ reasons this officer should not be posted to Rajaji reserve, he just ignores it… If you disagree with all your officers and your Minister, the least that is expected is that there should be some application of mind…” Justice Gavai addressed senior advocate Atmaram Nadkarni, appearing for the State government.
The Bench, also comprising Justices P.K. Mishra and K.V. Viswanathan, drew the government’s attention to the public trust doctrine. The doctrine holds the government responsible for the protection of natural resources as a trustee of the people.
“There is something like the public trust doctrine in this country, Mr Nadkarni. The heads of the Executive are not expected to act like ‘whatever I say, should be done’. Here, there are specific file notings right from the Section Officer, Deputy Secretary, Principal Secretary, all endorsed by the Minister. They had specific reasons for not recommending his posting at Rajaji… But just because he is Chief Minister, he can do anything…” Justice Gavai observed.
Mr Nadkarni said the order of transfer of Mr Rahul to the Rajaji Tiger Reserve was revoked on Tuesday but maintained that Mr Rahul was a “good officer.” He said it was Mr Rahul who had lodged complaints about the illegal activities in Corbett. Mr Nadkarni said show cause notice for departmental proceedings were issued against all personnel posted at Corbett at the time. He submitted that neither the police, nor the CBI or the Enforcement Directorate had indicted Mr Rahul so far. “Good officers should not be lost because of such things,” Mr Nadkarni reasoned.
“If there is nothing against him (Rahul), why is 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,” Justice Gavai reacted.
On March 6, the Supreme Court had directed the State to complete disciplinary proceedings against the officers involved in illegal activities within the Corbett Tiger Reserve. The CEC report in the apex court said Mr Rahul was specifically implicated in these proceedings. On July 13, the Uttarakhand government had sought a six-month extension from the top court to complete the disciplinary enquiry.
“They are trying to make a saint of him (Rahul),” Mr Parameshwar said. The court initially mooted the idea of asking the Chief Minister to file an affidavit but closed the case on the ground that Mr Rahul’s transfer order had been revoked.
(Manas Dasgupta)