The Supreme Court of India has delivered a stern warning to the Madhya Pradesh Government, instructing it to withdraw a controversial office order related to the Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) for Indian Forest Service (IFS) officers or face contempt proceedings.
IFS officers have raised concerns about a government order issued by the MP government.
The order in question, dated June 29, 2024, introduced a new evaluation mechanism for IFS officers ranging from Divisional Forest Officers (DFOs) to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF). This mechanism shifts the responsibility of assessing these officers’ performance from their peers within the Forest Department to non-Forest Department officials, including District Collectors and Divisional Commissioners.
The order stipulates that the performance evaluations of divisional forest officers, conservators, and chief conservators—who are stationed at the district level and involved in field activities such as those related to the Forest Rights Act, land acquisition, ecotourism, or mining in forest areas—will be conducted separately by district collectors and divisional commissioners.
Officers argue that this approach violates Supreme Court directives and could lead to situations where senior officers are evaluated by their junior counterparts.
In a hearing led by Justice B.R. Gavai, Advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal argued that the new order violates previous Supreme Court judgments, including T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India and Santosh Bharti v. State of Madhya Pradesh.
Mr Bansal contended that the involvement of non-Forest officers in evaluating tasks such as Joint Forest Management, Forest Rights Act matters, land acquisition, and other forest-related responsibilities undermines the specialized role of the IFS officers. He emphasized that this move could adversely affect forest conservation and protection efforts.
The Supreme Court expressed serious concerns about the implications of the new APAR format and has given the Madhya Pradesh Government a clear ultimatum: withdraw the order or face contempt proceedings. The Court has instructed the Senior Advocate representing the state to address the issue promptly.
The decision underscores the Court’s commitment to maintaining the integrity of the Indian Forest Services and ensuring that their evaluation process remains within the purview of professionals with expertise in forest management.
