‘CM is not a king’, why did the Supreme Court reprimand the Chief Minister of Uttarakhand

Supreme Court on Uttarakhand Appointment: The Supreme Court has strongly reprimanded Uttarakhand Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami. This reprimand has been given on the CM’s move to appoint a controversial IFS officer as the director of Rajaji Tiger Reserve, ignoring the opinion of the state forest minister and others. A bench of Justices BR Gavai, PK Mishra and KV Vishwanathan said that the heads of the government cannot be expected to be the kings of the old days and we are not in the feudal era.

However, the state government told the bench that the appointment order had been withdrawn on September 3. To this, the judges said, “There is something like the public trust doctrine in this country. The heads of the executive cannot be expected to be kings of the old days who will do what they have said… We are not in the feudal era… Just because he is the chief minister, can he do anything?”

The government said- the officer is being targeted

The bench also questioned why the chief minister has a special affection for the officer, given that departmental action is pending against him (senior Indian Forest Service officer Rahul). Senior advocate ANS Nadkarni, representing the state, said the officer was being targeted. Pointing out that the noting said the officer should not be posted in the Rajaji Tiger Reserve, the court said the chief minister was “simply ignoring it.”

Many senior officers had objected to the appointment

In fact, the appointment of Indian Forest Service officer Rahul, who is the former director of Corbett Tiger Reserve, as the director of Rajaji Tiger Reserve was termed wrong by senior officials. The court found that it was also supported by the Deputy Secretary, Principal Secretary and the Forest Minister of the state. Despite this, this appointment was made. The court said, “If the desk officer, Deputy Secretary, Principal Secretary disagree with the minister, then at least it is expected that you give some thought to why these people disagree with the proposal.”

‘If the officer is good then why is departmental action being taken’

On this, lawyer Nadkarni argued, “You cannot sacrifice a good officer against whom there is nothing.” On this the court asked, “If there is nothing, then why are you taking departmental action against him?” The judges said that unless there is prima facie evidence, departmental action cannot be initiated against anyone.

Read this also

Haryana elections: 30% new faces in BJP’s first list, 13 tickets changed, turncoats also given chance