Assessor checks different land: Forest officer rid of allegation

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: A forest officer who was accused of misappropriating certain amounts spent on afforestation of plantations and also the amount reserved for maintaining existing plantations has been exonerated by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (KSAT). The person deputed to assess the land visited another place resulting in the acquittal of the accused officer. The High Court has upheld the order of the KSAT.

The Department of Forest and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest approached the High Court with a petition challenging the KSAT order of May 25, 2022. Based on a private complaint to the Lokayukta, the case was inquiry was conducted against G Hanumanthaiah, a 44-yearold Range Forest Officer at the Seed Unit, Alkola, Shivamogga.

An enquiry was conducted against Hanumanthaiah and afdter concluding the enquiry the Enquiry Officer rendered a finding that the charges against him was proved. Hanumanthaiah approached the Tribunal against this finding. “The Tribunal, after exhaustive appreciation of the material on record, has found that this is a case of no evidence and has accordingly been pleased to allow the application,” the HC noted in its judgment.

The HC also noted that “On perusal of the material, we find that the bills in support of the expenses incurred for afforestation of plantations and maintenance of the existing plantations have been submitted by respondent No 1 (Hanumanthaiah).” The division bench of Justice G Narendar and Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar which heard the petition asked the government advocate “as to whether any objections have been raised by the Department or External Audit Team.”

The Government advocate submitted that “the bills of expenditure have been approved and accepted by the superiors and the External Audit Team also has not objections.” The HC also found that a wrong land was surveyed in the enquiry. “It has also come out in the evidence that the person deputed to visit and assess the land in which saplings have been planted, in fact visited another piece of land,” the HC said.

Dismissing the petition, the HC said, “The Tribunal has dealt with all these aspects and has rendered a finding of fact, which finding, the petitioners are unable to controvert. In that view of the matter, the reasons in support of the order impugned not being controverted, the order impugned does not warrant any interference.”