NEW DELHI, SEPT 5
The Supreme Court on Wednesday took strong exception to Uttarakhand Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami’s decision to appoint IFS officer Rahul as field director of the Rajaji Tiger Reserve after overruling objections from the principal secretary and the forest minister.
After senior advocate A N S Nadkarni said the CM was only trying not to sacrifice a “good officer”, Justice B R Gavai, presiding over a three-judge bench, said Dhami should at least have recorded the reasons for his disagreement with the objections raised by his own officials.
“We are not in the feudal era ki raja jaise bole waisa chale,” the judge said.
“There is something like a public trust doctrine in this country. The heads of the executive cannot be expected to be old-day kings that whatever they say they will do. When a specific noting is there right from the first officer, that is the section officer, endorsed by the Deputy Secretary, endorsed by by the Principal Secretary, endorsed by the honourable Minister that on account of ABC reasons, he should not be posted there, you think that despite of that, just because he is chief minister, he can do anything?, ” Justice Gavai asked.
The judge added, “There is a specific note … that departmental proceedings are initiated against him, that CBI enquiry is there and therefore he should not be posted anywhere in the tiger reserve. That is endorsed by the deputy secretary, that is endorsed by the principal secretary and the forest minister and this is all ignored by the chief minister!…”
On Wednesday, as the matter came up before the bench also comprising Justices P K Mishra and K V Viswanathan, following a report submitted by the Supreme Court-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC), Nadkarni submitted that in deference to the court, “the order posting Rahul, chief conservator of forest, as the field director of the Rajaji national park, has been withdrawn”.
The court, which recorded his submission, said no order was therefore necessary and closed the proceedings.
Nadkarni sought to explain that the CM had considered all the objections and even the CEC report while giving his assent to appoint the IFS officer.
But the court was not impressed. “You are trying to justify,” the court told the counsel.
“We are not in the feudal era ki raja jaise bole waisa chale”, said Justice Gavai, adding that when all the subordinate authorities give objections, “he (CM) just ignores it…He doesn’t consider all these objections right from the desk official”.
Gavai said the CM had made only a one-line comment when he should have given reasons.
Nadkarni said that unlike in a judgment, there is no system of giving detailed reasons in such matters.
Justice Gavai, however, said, “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.”
‘You can’t sacrifice a good officer’
Nadkarni said the matter went to the CM after the forest minister’s noting.
“They then ask what factually is against him. All these CEC notings, everything is considered. In deference to your lordship’s orders, we have replaced him. But what I am showing is, you can’t sacrifice a good officer against whom there is nothing.”
Justice Gavai said, “If there is nothing, why are you holding departmental proceedings against him?… Unless there is prima facie material, departmental proceedings are not initiated.”
Nadkarni said the departmental proceedings were initiated against all officials of the Corbett park following the discovery of some unauthorised constructions. He added that it was Rahul who ordered the demolition of those constructions.
The senior counsel added, “I only said CEC never blamed him. State police never blamed him, ED never blamed him, CBI never blamed him…The only thing which is against him is the disciplinary proceedings…”.
As Nadkarni repeated that Rahul was a good officer, Justice Gavai said, “Unless he is exonerated in the departmental proceedings, you can’t give a certificate of good officer”.
“Or withdraw the disciplinary proceedings,” he added. The court added that had the CM stopped with the forest minister’s notice and not proceeded further, it would not have gone into all these.
Justice Gavai also said that the newspaper reports about the matter were correct.
“There is no error in the newspaper reporting. The report said Chief Secretary and Forest Minister objected and in spite of that objection, the CM overruled. Nothing wrong in those reports,” he said.
