SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(AP) 1059

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
RAVI NATH TILHARI, B.V. L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI, JJ.
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Environment, Forest, Science & Technology, Rep.by its Principal Secretary and Others - Petitioners
Versus
Sri P. Maruthi Prasada Rao and Others - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 29304 Of 2022
Decided On : 22-12-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Sri Subrahmanyam Sriram, Adv. General Assisted by Sri G.V.S. Kishore Kumar, GP for Services-I
For the Respondents: Sri B. Adinarayana Rao, Sr. Counsel, Assisted by Sri A. Rajendrababu.

Forest Range Officers are not part of the State Forest Service under the Indian Forest Service Recruitment Rules due to the absence of required Central Government approval for promotion eligibility.

Headnote:(A) Indian Forest Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1966 - Rule 2(g)(i) - Promotion to Indian Forest Service - The Tribunal's order granting promotion to Forest Range Officers was quashed, holding that they do not qualify as part of the State Forest Service due to lack of Central Government approval, as required under the rules. (Paras 81, 82)

(B) Administrative Law - Judicial Review - The Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction by equating the status of Forest Range Officers with that of Assistant Conservator of Forests, which is not within the Tribunal's authority. (Paras 71, 82)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners challenged the Tribunal’s order directing consideration of a Forest Range Officer for promotion to the Indian Forest Service, asserting that the Forest Range Officer does not fall within the definition of State Forest Service under the Recruitment Rules. (Paras 2-6)

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the Forest Range Officer service lacks the necessary approval from the Central Government to be classified as State Forest Service, thus ineligible for promotion to the Indian Forest Service. (Paras 81, 82)

Issues: Whether Forest Range Officers qualify as members of the State Forest Service under Rule 2(g)(i) of the Indian Forest Service Recruitment Rules, and if the Tribunal had jurisdiction to equate their status with Assistant Conservator of Forests. (Paras 21, 81)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the approval by the Central Government is mandatory for inclusion in the State Forest Service, which the Forest Range Officers lacked, rendering the Tribunal's order unsustainable. (Paras 81, 82)

Result: Writ Petition allowed; Tribunal's order quashed.

JUDGMENT :

(Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.)

Heard Sri Subrahmanyam Sriram, learned Advocate General, assisted by Sri G. V. S. Kishore Kumar, leaned Government Pleader for Services-I and Sri B. Adinarayana Rao, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri A. Rajendrababu, learned counsel for the 1st respondent. No representation for the 2nd respondent-Union of India, so also 4th respondent- B. Vijay Kumar.

2. The petitioners-State of Andhra Pradesh and its authorities have filed this writ petition challenging the Order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (in short ‘the Tribunal’) for the following relief:

    “to issue an appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of “WRIT OF CERTIORARI” calling for the records relating to the orders of the Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal in OA.No.020/00628/2021, dated 12.04.2022 and to set aside the same as holding as erroneous and contrary to law and pass such other order or orders…..”

3. The 1st respondent/Applicant before the Tribunal filed O.A.No.020/00628/2021 before the Central Administrative Tribunal for considering him for promotion to the cadre of Indian Forest Service (IFS) from the category of Forest Range Officer (FRO).

4. The case of the 1st respondent was that he was directly recruited as Forest Range Officer in May 2006 and was thereafter promoted as Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF) in August 2020. His next promotional post is Deputy Conservator of Forests (DCF). The grievance raised was that the respondents in O.A, the petitioners herein, were not considering the 1st respondent's claim for promotion to Indian Forest Service, though the rules and regulations provide for consideration of appointment of Forest Range Officer's cadre Officers to Indian Forest Service on promotion, and the 1st respondent was eligible for such consideration, and thereby, the denial of such consideration was violative of the fundamental right under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

5. The present petitioners filed reply in O.A. The Union Public Service Commission and the Union of India also filed reply. Their stand inter alia was that the service records of the Officers of the State Forest Service (SFS) are maintained by the State Government and the eligibility of State Forest Service Officers comes under the purview of the State Government. Their further stand was that the post of Forest Range Officer was declared as gazetted post, but Forest Range Officer cannot be automatically considered for promotion to Indian Forest Service, and only the Officers belonging to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forests/Deputy Conservator of Forests are to be included in the zone of consideration as per seniority. Their stand was that though the Forest Range Officer belongs to the gazetted category, but cannot be considered for appointment by promotion to Indian Forest Service. As per Andhra Pradesh Public Employment Order, dated 1975, the Forest Range Officer is a local cadre post in each zone, whereas Assistant Conservator of Forests is a State Cadre post. Their further stand was that as per G.O.Ms.Nos.154 and 159, dated 18.11.1997/08.12.2008 there are separate entrance and training rules for State Forest Service and Forest Range Officers. The Forest Range Officers do not belong to the State Forest Service so as to be considered for Indian Forest Service. In the absence of adequate number of Officers, the vacancies have to be carried forward to the next panel. It was further their stand that the selection for the panel year 2013 was under process and the contingency of number of Assistant Conservator of Forest/Deputy Conservator of Forest Officers to be considered for Indian Forest Service were not less than the number of posts. The posts of Assistant Conservator of Forest/Deputy Conservator of Forest have been included in State Forest Service, but not Forest Range Officers, as per the Indian Forest Service (Recruitment) Rules of 1966 (in short 'the Recruitment Ru

                                        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                                        1
                                        2
                                        3
                                        4
                                        5
                                        6
                                        7
                                        8
                                        9
                                        10
                                        11
                                        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                                        supreme today icon
                                        logo-black

                                        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                                        Please visit our Training & Support
                                        Center or Contact Us for assistance

                                        qr

                                        Scan Me!

                                        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                                        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                                        whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
                                        whatsapp-icon Back to top