Observing that the state cannot allow “subordinate” workers to dominate officers, the Uttarakhand High Court has called for a review of the transfer of Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve’s director, who has alleged that he was moved from his post following a “malicious campaign” by workers in the office.
The petitioner, Pankaj Kumar, who took over as the Conservator of Forest and director of the reserve in March 2024, was transferred before his minimum tenure was completed. The High Court has asked the government to “advise” the forest department to review the transfer order.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice G Narender and Subhash Upadhyay said that a senior officer cannot be moved at the expense of group B and C officers. “You can’t allow officers to be dominated by workers. The next officer will have to sit quiet… Do you want such an administration?” the Bench asked the counsel for the state.
The counsel said that the whole workforce was against him. To this, the court said, “If you allow subordinate workers to gang up and dictate posting, the forest will vanish… This is shocking. Tomorrow, four fellows will raise a flag against the Chief Secretary; will you shunt him? If they have a complaint, let them file.”
The petitioner’s counsel, Abhijay Negi, argued that the transfer was blatant non-compliance with mandatory procedure under the Indian Forest Service (Cadre) Rules, 1966, and the Indian Forest Service (Cadre) Amendment Rules, 2014, which mandate a minimum tenure protection of two years. He also cited the Supreme Court judgment in TSR Subramanian and Others v Union of India and Others, 2014. In the case, the top court had observed that civil servants had little stability of tenure, particularly in state governments where transfers and postings are made frequently, “at the whims and fancies of the executive head for political and other considerations and not in public interest.”
The petition alleged that employees had run a “vexatious and malicious campaign” against the officer, alleging harassment of Forest Department employees working in Chamoli.
Meanwhile, the Uttaranchal Forest Ministerial Association had written to the administration, stating that the officer was misbehaving and harassing the workers, and that they would resort to strikes and boycotts if this was not addressed. The association had claimed that the petitioner created an oppressive working environment. It had also cited past instances of “punitive working style”.
Story continues below this ad
The petitioner claimed that this was a baseless allegation, and that before a probe was launched to look into this, he was transferred to the post of Conservator of Forests, Forest Research/State Silviculturist in Haldwani.
The court said that the state should review the order, orally observing that it should be stayed till the next date, till an affidavit is filed by the state. “If they gang up (against an officer), you throw them out… Unless he has committed some grave wrong, you should not accept such demands. The Chief Conservator who has agreed (to this) should be prosecuted for misconduct… If they gang up, they have someone’s blessing. It is a very wrong message you are putting out… You are guaranteeing complete anarchy,” the court said.
