Guwahati: The Gauhati High Court has asked the Assam government to clarify whether two communications issued by the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) concerning retired Indian Forest Service (IFS) officer M.K. Yadava were examined before he was granted a third contractual extension as Special Chief Secretary (Forest).
A division bench of Justice Michael Zothankhuma and Justice Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL/57/2026) filed by environmental activist Rohit Choudhury, on Wednesday directed Additional Advocate General P.N. Goswami to obtain instructions on what action, if any, had been taken by the state government against Yadava pursuant to the communications issued by the Centre.
The court also specifically asked whether the two communications, both dated May 29, 2025, had been considered by the competent authority before Yadava was granted his third extension through an order dated May 14, 2026.
The court’s direction assumes significance against the backdrop of the Assam government’s earlier stand that there was no question of taking action against Yadava over the forest land diversion permissions granted by him when he was serving as Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF) and Head of Forest Force (HoFF).
In communications dated November 12 and 13, 2024, the Assam government‘s Environment and Forest Department had informed the Deputy Director General of Forests (Central), MoEF&CC, Regional Office, Shillong, that Yadava had acted in the bona fide interest of the state and that the government would abide by the Centre’s decision in the matter.
The communications also referred to a notice issued by the MoEF&CC regional office to Yadava over alleged violations of Sections 3A and 3B of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980, read with Rule 15(3) of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Rules, 2023.
Against this backdrop, the High Court directed the Additional Advocate General to ascertain what action, if any, had been taken by the Assam government against Yadava pursuant to the two communications issued by the Centre on May 29, 2025.
The bench also wants to know whether the matter was examined by the concerned authority before approving his third extension as Special Chief Secretary (Forest).
Govt had defended Yadava’s re-engagement
The latest proceedings follow the Assam government’s strong defence of Yadava’s re-engagement in an affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Personnel Department.
In its affidavit, the government had urged the High Court to dismiss the PIL filed by Choudhury, arguing that the challenge to Yadava’s appointment was not maintainable and that the re-engagement had been made in accordance with the state’s administrative guidelines.
The government had also pointed out that an earlier PIL (18/2025) challenging Yadava’s engagement and re-engagement had been dismissed by the Gauhati High Court on March 18, 2025.
It argued that public interest litigation in service matters was generally not maintainable except in cases involving a writ of quo warranto, and alleged that the petitioner was attempting to reopen an issue already decided by the court.
The Personnel Department further defended the February 16, 2024, amendment to the state’s July 18, 2018, Office Memorandum governing contractual engagement of retired government officers.
According to the government, the amendment had not diluted the existing safeguards requiring such engagements to be made only under rare and exceptional circumstances and subject to satisfactory performance.
It maintained that Yadava’s latest re-engagement had received the approval of the state Cabinet on May 13, 2026, followed by the notification dated May 14, 2026.
Forest land diversion at centre of controversy
The controversy surrounding Yadava’s re-engagement is also linked to his decisions permitting the diversion of forest land in Geleky Reserved Forest in Sivasagar district and Innerline Reserved Forest in Hailakandi district for the establishment of Assam Police commando battalion camps.
The government’s affidavit defended the permissions granted by Yadava for diversion of 28 hectares of forest land in Geleky on November 15, 2022, and 11.5 hectares at Damchera in Innerline Reserved Forest on September 28, 2023.
The government argued that the permissions were granted under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, as it existed at the time, and that the Centre subsequently granted Stage-I approval on January 21, 2025, followed by final Stage-II approval on February 20, 2025.
The affidavit also cited a May 30, 2025, National Green Tribunal (NGT) order concerning the Innerline Reserved Forest diversion, arguing that the tribunal had found no reason for further interference in the matter.
The government had further maintained that the commando battalion camps were established to protect forests facing extensive encroachment and security threats along Assam’s interstate borders.
However, the latest High Court order has focused specifically on whether the Centre’s communications concerning Yadava were considered before the state government granted him another contractual extension.
Third extension under judicial scrutiny
Yadava, an Assam-Meghalaya cadre IFS officer, retired as PCCF and Head of Forest Force in February 2024.
He was initially engaged on a contractual basis as Special Chief Secretary (Forest) for one year on February 29, 2024. His engagement was subsequently extended on February 21, 2025, and a third extension was granted on May 14, 2026.
The present PIL challenges the third extension of his contractual appointment under the state government’s policy governing the re-engagement of retired government officers.
The High Court has now sought a specific response from the state government on whether the relevant communications from the Union Environment Ministry and any action taken pursuant to them were examined before the May 2026 extension was approved.
The matter will come up for further hearing on Thursday (November 12).