The Government of India has filed a petition in the Nainital High Court challenging a seven-year-old order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) concerning IFS officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi. The petition also seeks to nullify a contempt notice issued by the CAT on May 25 this year, following a hearing in Chaturvedi’s long-pending plea related to his Annual Confidential Report (ACR).
The matter was heard on Friday by the division bench of Chief Justice R. N. Narayanan and Justice Alok Mehra. Attorney General R. Venkataramani appeared on behalf of the Cabinet Secretary, arguing for the cancellation of the CAT’s earlier directive issued in favour of Chaturvedi, who is currently serving as Chief Conservator of Forests (Research). The Centre also requested that the contempt proceedings initiated by CAT’s Nainital Circuit Bench be revoked.
This case dates back to April 16, 2018, when CAT had rejected a prayer filed by the then Cabinet Secretary. The petition was related to the downgrade of Sanjiv Chaturvedi’s Annual Confidential Report for the year 2015–16, a period during which he was on central deputation at AIIMS Delhi between June 2012 and June 2016.
The Centre’s plea additionally challenges an order passed by CAT on February 23, 2023, which directed the Cabinet Secretary, Health Secretary, Central Vigilance Commission, and AIIMS Delhi to furnish documents requested by Chaturvedi. These documents were linked to his ACR and the decisions taken during his tenure.
A separate petition was also submitted by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), requesting the High Court to replace the Cabinet Secretary’s name with that of the DoPT Secretary in the list of respondents in the original CAT proceedings.
Chaturvedi had initially approached CAT’s Nainital bench in July 2017, alleging that his ACR had been downgraded deliberately. CAT stayed the implementation of the downgraded report in September 2017. Chaturvedi claimed that the adverse entries in his report were retaliatory, arising from his anti-corruption actions during his AIIMS tenure, where he had pursued cases against senior bureaucrats and medical officials. He alleged that many of these cases were deliberately suppressed and that the downgrade was an act of reprisal.
