No more Forest role for M.K. Yadava, Assam govt tells Gauhati High Court

No more Forest role for M.K. Yadava, Assam govt tells Gauhati High Court
November 12, 2026

LATEST NEWS

No more Forest role for M.K. Yadava, Assam govt tells Gauhati High Court

Guwahati: The Assam government on Thursday informed the Gauhati High Court that it would not extend the contractual engagement of retired Indian Forest Service (IFS) officer M.K. Yadava as Special Chief Secretary (Forest), or engage him in any other capacity under the Forest Department.

The government also informed the court that Yadava’s third extension as Special Chief Secretary (Forest) ended on November 11, and the state Cabinet had decided against any further engagement of the retired officer in the Forest Department.

However, in a significant development, the government told the court that Yadava would be re-engaged on a contractual basis in the Mines and Minerals Department.

Following the government’s submission, a division bench of Justice Michael Zothankhuma and Justice Sanjeev Kumar Sharma closed the Public Interest Litigation (PIL 57/2026) filed by environmental activist Rohit Choudhury, challenging Yadava’s continued post-retirement engagement.

The submission was made by Additional Advocate General P.N. Goswami, who appeared for the Assam government during Thursday’s hearing.

“On considering all the above, we do not find any reason to continue with the present PIL,” the division bench observed before closing the case.

The development came a day after the High Court sought clarification from the Assam government on whether it had examined two communications issued by the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) on May 29, 2025, before granting Yadava his third extension.

The court had sought details of the action, if any, taken against Yadava in response to the Centre’s communications and whether the matter had been considered by the competent authority before his third extension was approved on May 14, 2026.

The PIL filed by Choudhury questioned the legality of Yadava’s continued contractual engagement after his retirement as Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF) and Head of Forest Force in February 2024.

Yadava was initially appointed Special Chief Secretary (Forest) on a contractual basis for one year on February 29, 2024. His engagement was subsequently extended on February 21, 2025, and again on May 14, 2026.

The controversy surrounding his re-engagement was linked to forest land diversion permissions granted during his tenure as PCCF and Head of Forest Force, including the diversion of 28 hectares in Geleky Reserved Forest in Sivasagar district and 11.5 hectares in Innerline Reserved Forest at Damchera in Hailakandi district.

The MoEF&CC had issued communications concerning alleged violations of provisions of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980, and the corresponding 2023 Rules.

The Assam government had earlier defended Yadava’s re-engagement before the High Court, arguing that it was legally valid and administratively justified.

While the latest order brings an end to the PIL, the court did not adjudicate the merits of the allegations concerning the forest land diversion decisions or the legality of Yadava’s proposed contractual engagement in the Mines and Minerals Department.





Share this post:

POLL

Who Will Vote For?

Other

Republican

Democrat

RECENT NEWS

A fake fundraising website showed $16,000 collected for a 13-year-old Atlanta boy's funeral; his family said it never received the money, and a funeral director stepped in to cover the costs | World News

A fake fundraising website showed $16,000 collected for a 13-year-old Atlanta boy’s funeral; his family said it never received the money, and a funeral director stepped in to cover the costs | World News

Manipur CM honours Youth Olympics bronze medalist Rajkumari Lanchenbi Chanu

Manipur CM honours Youth Olympics bronze medalist Rajkumari Lanchenbi Chanu

A Texas businessman said he bought a home in 2015 with a partner's help while abroad, but she died and her children inherited it; an appeals court rejected his ownership challenge despite a $287,000 bank transfer

A Texas businessman said he bought a home in 2015 with a partner’s help while abroad, but she died and her children inherited it; an appeals court rejected his ownership challenge despite a $287,000 bank transfer

Dynamic Country URL Go to Country Info Page