The Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down a government order issued by the Madhya Pradesh administration that allowed Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers to review the performance appraisal reports of Indian Forest Service (IFS) officers, terming the move “contemptuous” and contrary to established judicial directions.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud (Note: actual CJI may vary by date; confirm with final data) and Justice Augustine George Masih held that the June 29, 2024, government order (GO) was in “total violation” of the apex court’s earlier rulings, particularly the binding judgment delivered on September 22, 2000.
“We have no hesitation to hold that the impugned GO is rather contemptuous in nature,” the court observed, noting that the state issued it without seeking any clarification or modification of the 2000 ruling.
Background: Long-Standing Directions Ignored
In the 2000 judgment, the Supreme Court had ruled that officers up to the rank of Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests must be assessed by an immediate superior from within the forest department. Only for the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests — the highest post in the IFS — could a non-forest officer serve as the reviewing authority due to the absence of a senior within the service.
The bench remarked that while all other states had complied with this mandate, Madhya Pradesh had deviated by continuing a practice where IAS officers, including district collectors, were assessing IFS officers. This included entries in Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs), which play a critical role in promotions and career advancement.
Court Criticises GO, But Holds Back Contempt Action
The Supreme Court took serious note of the violation and warned that it could have initiated contempt proceedings. “However, we refrain ourselves from doing so,” the court said, emphasizing that the GO was “liable to be quashed and set aside.”
The bench further ordered the Madhya Pradesh government to frame fresh rules within one month, strictly in line with the Supreme Court’s 2000 directions.
Clarifications and Acceptable Practice
The judgment acknowledged that there could be situations where IAS officers like collectors or commissioners may need to record comments on IFS officers — particularly with regard to execution of district-level development projects. However, it clarified that such comments should be provided on a separate sheet and must be reviewed by a superior officer within the forest department itself.
The bench also took note of a clarification issued by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) in September 2004, which reiterated that the Supreme Court’s 2000 ruling applied to forest officers working within the forest department, and not to those on deputation or posted outside.
Implications
This ruling reasserts the autonomy and internal hierarchy of the Indian Forest Service, and marks a strong judicial pushback against bureaucratic overreach by state administrations in conflict with court orders. It also reinforces the principle that performance evaluation within All India Services must adhere to service-specific structures unless otherwise legally permitted.
The Madhya Pradesh government must now overhaul its performance review process for forest officers to ensure compliance with constitutional and judicial mandates.
