The Supreme Court has recently directed the central government to address the long-standing concerns of Indian Forest Service (IFS) officers regarding their performance appraisal reports (PAR) being prepared by Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers. The apex court highlighted the conflict between the two cadres and stressed the need for a fair resolution.

Justice B.R. Gavai, while hearing the matter, remarked that IAS officers often assert supremacy over IFS and IPS officers. This observation reflects the ongoing dissatisfaction among IFS officers who argue that IAS officials lack the technical knowledge required to assess their work effectively.

“IAS officers tend to show supremacy over IFS and IPS officers.” – Justice B.R. Gavai

Read Also:- Supreme Court Directs High Courts to Gather Data on Pending Execution Petitions

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the government, assured the court that efforts would be made to resolve the issue amicably. “We will sit together... the government is really concerned... I will again sit with him (Amicus K Parmeswar) and we will find a way out so that the ultimate object is achieved... a way needs to be found,” Mehta stated.

The matter arose in response to a challenge against the Madhya Pradesh government’s order dated June 29, 2024, which introduced a new mechanism for the appraisal of forest officers. Under this system, Divisional Forest Officers, Conservators, and Chief Conservators working at the district level—who handle critical tasks such as the Forest Rights Act implementation, land acquisition, ecotourism, and mining activities—would have their work appraised by District Collectors and Divisional Commissioners.

IFS officers argue that IAS officials do not possess the required expertise in forest conservation and wildlife protection. Additionally, the core objectives of forest officials (conservation and ecological balance) often conflict with the revenue-centric approach of IAS officers, particularly concerning mining rights and land use.

The Madhya Pradesh Indian Forest Service Association has strongly opposed the order, pointing to a previous Supreme Court ruling in the T.N. Godavarman case (2000). The court had stated that only senior officers within the Forest Department should be responsible for evaluating forest officers.

“The competent authority to write the confidential report of forest department officers will be officers superior to them in the same service when posted in the field.” – Supreme Court in T.N. Godavarman case (2000)

Read Also:- Supreme Court: No Transfer of S.138 NI Act Cases Under S.406 CrPC Due to Territorial Jurisdiction

The association further argues that including non-forest officers, such as District Collectors and Divisional Commissioners, in the evaluation process is both legally flawed and administratively unsound. A significant concern is that senior IFS officers, like Chief Conservators of Forests, might be evaluated by IAS officers of a lower rank in terms of pay scale and grade.

Madhya Pradesh Government’s Defense

The Madhya Pradesh government, however, has defended its decision, asserting that it complies with the amended All India Services (Performance Appraisal Report) Rules of 2007. According to the government, the role of District Collectors and Divisional Commissioners in the appraisal process is limited to providing additional reports on welfare schemes and does not interfere with core forest management duties.

Despite this justification, the Supreme Court remains unconvinced and has urged the Centre to find a balanced solution that ensures fair and knowledgeable assessments of IFS officers' performance. The issue underscores the broader conflict between different branches of India’s bureaucracy and the need for clear policies that respect domain expertise.

Case Title: IN RE: T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 202/1995