New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought the assistance of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to address the grievances of Indian Forest Service (IFS) officers regarding the new performance appraisal report (PAR) mechanism introduced by the Madhya Pradesh government. The IFS officers have raised concerns over their PARs being written by Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers, as per a June 2024 office order issued by the state.
A bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and K Vinod Chandran was hearing a petition filed by Gaurav Bansal, challenging the new framework which transferred the authority to write the PARs of IFS officers from Divisional Forest Officers (DFOs) to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF). IFS officers argue that their performance appraisals should be conducted by forest experts, not IAS officers, as the latter may not be well-versed in the intricacies of forest conservation and wildlife protection.
Justice Gavai noted the long-standing tension between the IAS and IFS cadres, stating that IAS officers often exert undue influence over their IFS counterparts. He emphasized that the IFS officers feel that appraisals conducted by IAS officers are prone to errors due to their lack of understanding of the specialized work IFS officers perform.
The Supreme Court bench urged the matter to be resolved, with Justice Gavai observing, “It should be resolved.” Solicitor General Mehta, in his response, expressed his intention to deliberate on the issue and consult with the relevant stakeholders. He also acknowledged that the administrative hierarchy clearly outlines who is responsible for writing the PARs of various officers.
The controversy stems from an office order issued on June 29, 2024, which the Supreme Court had previously criticized. The court had warned the Madhya Pradesh government that if the order was not withdrawn, contempt proceedings could be initiated for violating its directives.
The Madhya Pradesh IFS Association has also raised concerns, sending a protest letter to Chief Minister Mohan Yadav, highlighting the vital role that forest officers play in conservation efforts. The association argued that the new system would demoralize IFS officers, as it disregards their expertise in forest and wildlife conservation.
In support of the new PAR mechanism, IAS officers pointed to similar rules already implemented in other biodiversity-rich states, including Karnataka, Odisha, Maharashtra, and Rajasthan.
The case continues to draw attention to the complex relationship between the IAS and IFS, and the court’s intervention signals a crucial moment in resolving this administrative conflict.
