Appraisers, know what you appraise

In his essay, 'The Bureaucratic Caste System', former IAS officer and Padma Bhushan recipient M N Buch likened India's bureaucracy to caste hierarchy: IAS as brahmins, IPS kshatriyas, general bureaucracy as vaishyas, and teachers and scientists as shudras. This unwritten 'caste system' was debated in the Supreme Court this week when a challenge to the MP government's 2024 order on performance appraisal reports (PAR) for forest officers came up. The order mandates district-level forest officers - divisional forest officers, conservators and chief conservators - be appraised by district magistrates (DMs) and divisional commissioners (DCs), both IAS officers.

MP forest officers contend IAS officials lack technical expertise to judge them. Their priorities - like revenue from mining - may also conflict with those of forest officials, whose primary mandate is conservation. Thus, appraisals risk being flawed. Forest officers further asserted that inclusion of non-forest officers in the evaluation of forest-related work is legally and administratively unsound. They highlighted that a situation may arise where senior officers posted on the field like chief conservator of forests are appraised by DCs, officers of junior rank.

MP's forest officers have a valid case beyond the matter of rank. Indian Forest Service (IFS) is a specialised cadre, focused on conservation, sustainable resource management and environmental protection. Unlike policy-driven IAS roles, forest officials require expertise in ecology and forestry. While IAS officers 'specialise in generalisations', a separate command structure for IFS ensures more informed evaluations. Given the service's unique challenges, it makes sense to keep performance assessments within its ranks.