The Supreme Court has made it clear that Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers are not allowed to write the Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) of Indian Forest Service (IFS) officers up to the rank of Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (APCCF).
This decision came on May 21, as the Court struck down a Government Order (GO) issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh on June 29, 2024. The GO had allowed comments by District Collectors and Divisional Commissioners to be included in the Performance Appraisal Reports (PARs) of various IFS officers. This was seen as going against earlier Supreme Court directions.
Read also: Supreme Court Urges Permanent Forum for Consumer Disputes, Seeks New Appointment Rules from Union
The Court emphasized:
"The reporting authority should be the immediate superior officer from the Forest Department for IFS officers up to the APCCF rank."
The Court referred to its previous rulings in State of Haryana v. P.C. Wadhwa (1987) and Santosh Bharti v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2007). These judgments clarified that IAS officers cannot act as reviewing or reporting authorities for IFS officers, except in the case of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF). Even then, the authority must be higher in rank and aware of the PCCF’s work.
Additionally, a 2004 attempt by the Madhya Pradesh Government to change this rule was already rejected in the TN Godavarman Thirumalpad case, after taking input from the Central Empowered Committee.
The Court also cited the 2024 case State of Assam v. Binod Kumar, where a similar rule was struck down because civil service officers were made reporting officers for police officers.
Read also: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Seeking FIR Against Justice Yashwant Varma, Directs Petitioners
The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) had also previously clarified in a letter dated November 8, 2001:
“For writing ACRs of IFS officers up to APCCF rank, the reporting authority must be their immediate superior in the Forest Department.”
Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih observed:
“The G.O. dated 29th June 2024 is totally in violation of this Court's directions issued in the Santosh Bharti and Godavarman cases.”
Although the Court did not take contempt action, it warned that no other state has adopted such a practice. The Court also allowed collectors and commissioners to give input about development-related work by IFS officers, but this input must be reviewed by IFS superiors only.
Read also: Supreme Court Directs Tamil Nadu to Identify Agama Temples, Allows Priest Appointments in Non-Agama
Justice Gavai further remarked during the hearing:
“In my experience as a government pleader and a judge, IAS officers want to show their supremacy over IPS and IFS officers… There is always heartburn.”
The Court has directed the State of Madhya Pradesh to amend its rules in compliance with the Court’s earlier judgments.
Senior Advocate K Parameshwar appeared as amicus curiae, and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta represented the State.
Case : In Re Performance Appraisal Reports Of The Officers Of The Indian Forest Service
