New Delhi: A group of 60 former civil servants has raised serious concerns about a potential conflict of interest within the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), a body advising the Supreme Court on crucial environmental matters.
In an open letter addressed to the Chief Justice of India on June 30, 2025, the group, identifying themselves as the Constitutional Conduct Group, argued that the current composition of the CEC could compromise the impartiality of its advice, particularly concerning the contentious Forest Conservation Amendment Act (FCAA) 2023.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
The letter highlights that the CEC, originally constituted in 2002 by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) under Supreme Court directives, was intended to monitor compliance with court orders on forests and wildlife and offer technical guidance.
The initial committee included independent experts alongside former government officers, ensuring a balance and preventing conflicts of interest.4
However, the group states that since 2023, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) has appointed only former government officers to all four member posts of the CEC.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
These include three retired Indian Forest Service officers and a retired scientist who previously worked for the MoEFCC.
Notably, two of these members held the highest positions in the MoEFCC, including Director General and Special Secretary, and were actively involved in policy-making, including the very policies now being challenged.
The former bureaucrats, including prominent names like Anita Agnihotri (former Secretary, Social Justice Empowerment, GoI), Najeeb Jung (former Lieutenant Governor, Delhi), G.K. Pillai (former Home Secretary, GoI), and Julio Ribeiro (former Director General of Police, Punjab), argue that a CEC composed solely of individuals who previously shaped government forest policy cannot provide unbiased advice to the Supreme Court.
They expressed fear that the outcome of cases challenging the FCAA 2023 could be compromised, as the Supreme Court often gives weight to the CEC’s recommendations.
The letter specifically points out that a current CEC member was instrumental in preparing and defending the FCAA 2023 before the Joint Parliamentary Committee.
Furthermore, several memoranda permitting the use of degraded forests for compensatory afforestation, contrary to the Godavarman order of 1996, were issued during the tenure of some current CEC members while they held top positions in the MoEFCC.
An instance of this alleged conflict was highlighted in a recent Supreme Court order on ‘zudpi’ forests in Maharashtra.
The former civil servants noted that the Supreme Court’s order of May 22, 2025, heavily relied on CEC advice recommending the use of ‘zudpi’ forests for compensatory afforestation, considering them ecologically inferior.
The group countered this, stating that ‘zudpi’ forests are crucial habitats for endangered species and serve as vital wildlife corridors. While acknowledging that the Supreme Court did not fully accept the CEC’s recommendations in this instance, the group emphasized the inherent bias.
The Constitutional Conduct Group urged the Chief Justice to ensure that the CEC’s composition includes renowned independent experts from outside the government to guarantee fair and unbiased advice, especially in ongoing cases related to the FCAA 2023, to protect India’s forests, wildlife, and ecological security.