India News | HC Seeks Reply Within Two Weeks from U'khand Govt on IFS Officer's Transfer
Get latest articles and stories on India at LatestLY. The Uttarakhand High Court sought a reply within two weeks from the state government on Friday on a petition challenging the removal of former Head of Forest Force (HoFF) Rajiv Bhartari from the post.
Nainital, Feb 25 (PTI) The Uttarakhand High Court sought a reply within two weeks from the state government on Friday on a petition challenging the removal of former Head of Forest Force (HoFF) Rajiv Bhartari from the post.
Bhartari, who claims to be the seniormost forest officer in the state, was removed from the post and made the chairman of the Uttarakhand Biodiversity Board in November last year, following allegations of illegal constructions carried out in the buffer zone of the Corbett Tiger Reserve during his stint as HoFF.
Hearing Bhartari's petition challenging the constitutionality of his transfer, a division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra and Justice NS Dhanik asked the state government to file a reply, justifying the move, within two weeks.
Bhartari had filed the petition in the court, saying he is the seniormost Indian Forest Service (IFS) officer in the state. But on 25 November 2021, the government transferred him from the post of Chief Conservator of Forests to the post of Chairman, Biodiversity Board, which was against the Constitution, the petition said.
Also Read | NSE Fraud Case: Anand Subramanian Sent to CBI Custody Till March 6.
The officer has claimed in the petition that one of the reasons behind his transfer is the illegal construction happening inside the Corbett Tiger Reserve.
Bhartari was said to have been investigating these constructions, which allegedly led to his transfer. The petition also alleges that the then state forest minister (Harak Singh Rawat), with the support of an officer, wanted to remove Bhartari from the post of HoFF in order to derail the investigations into the construction works.
Four representations were made to the state government on behalf of the petitioner but the latter did not respond to those.
The petitioner has claimed that there were political reasons behind his transfer and it was in violation of his constitutional rights.
(The above story is verified and authored by Press Trust of India (PTI) staff. PTI, India’s premier news agency, employs more than 400 journalists and 500 stringers to cover almost every district and small town in India.. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)