Disposed

Tapeshwar Singh Bhati v. Pccf Hoff Rajasthan Forest Department

NGT7 Apr 2026Original Application No. 83/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal considered an application alleging irregularities in 11th plantation works in Rajasthan involving flawed infrastructure and alleged misuse of CAMPA funds. Noting that a preliminary enquiry and show cause notice were already issued, the Tribunal directed the Environment Secretary to monitor progress but held that audit and disciplinary actions are outside its jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Ordered the Secretary, Department of Environment to call a report on the progress of the departmental enquiry and action taken.

Tapeshwar Singh Bhati vs Pccf Hoff Rajasthan Forest… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No.01

¶2

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL (THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION)

¶3

Original Application No.83/2026(CZ)

¶4

Tapeshwar Singh Bhati Applicant(s)

¶5

Vs.

¶6

PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan Forest Department & Anr. Respondent(s)

¶7

Date of Hearing: 07.04.2026

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. PRASHANT GARGAVA, EXPERT MEMBER

¶9

For Applicant (s): Mr. Tapeshwar Singh Bhati, in person For Respondent(s) : None

¶10

ORDER

¶11

The grievances of the Applicant are irregularities or failure in the development of 11^th Plantations on 650 hectares of forest land at Range Rajgarh Forest Division, Alwar, in terms of wrong site selection, short/defective work done at the site, non-compliance of the departmental guidelines against the Intergenerational Equity Principle and the Public Trust Doctrine.

¶12

It is submitted that in the year 2023-2024, the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Forest Division, Alwar, was assigned the task of development of the 11 plantations on 650 hectares of forest land pertaining to the range Rajgarh, and the Chief Conservator of Forest informed the Respondent No.1 through letter dated 04.06.2024 about serious irregularities related to the development of said 11 plantations by the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Alwar Range, Rajgarh, including wrong site selection, short and defective works, works being done by JCB

¶13

¶14

O.A. No.83/2026(CZ) Tapeshwar Singh Bhati Vs. PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan Forest Department & Anr.

¶15

Machines and charged as per labour rates on the basis of fabricated documents, no authentication of works mentioned in MB, appointment of works charge employees as site in-charge, payments made on the basis of forged documents/signatures and gross violations of departmental guidelines and general financial rules. Further Respondent No.1 and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Admin.) approved the detailed enquiry of the matter escalated by the Chief Conservator of Forest, Jaipur vide his said letter dated 04.06.2024 and observed/approved that “… It would be proper if we first of all gets these sites verified by P & M unit and only if grave shortcomings are found then we may refer it to ACB. So, it is suggested that first a 100% evaluation of these sites may be taken up .”

¶16

Further submissions are that the Evaluation Report submitted by the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Planning and Monitoring, was considered and Chief Conservator of Forest, Jaipur, was appointed as a Preliminary Enquiry Officer, who conducted the preliminary enquiry and issued a show cause notice for the forged signature of office bearers, short work, manipulation in the measurement book, forged billings, fake payments, misappropriation of the Government money etc.

¶17

The Prayer of the Applicant in the application is to make audit of the all the alleged Forest Protection and Management Committee across the State of Rajasthan with regard to the CAMPA fund and to take actions against the public servants.

¶18

It is to be noted that, Rajasthan is the largest state of country with 61% of the Thar deserts lying in it and as per National Forest Policy 1988, the forest and tree cover of the state should be 33%, but, the in hospitable climate and edaphic conditions come in the way of the state

¶19

¶20

O.A. No.83/2026(CZ) Tapeshwar Singh Bhati Vs. PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan Forest Department & Anr.

¶21

of Rajasthan to have more than 20% vegetal cover of the geographical area of the state. In order to achieve the 33% of Forest Cover it is imperative for State to take massive plantation programmes on fallow lands, waste lands, surplus revenue lands, community lands, degraded private lands and by effectively protecting the existing natural resources. Further, it is also important to mention there that forestry cannot succeed in the state without involvement of the local people and various other government and non- government agencies.

¶22

¶23

The vision document states -

¶24

i. To restore the ecological status by intensive reforestation and in situ soil and moisture conservation to maintain the soil-moisture regime.

¶25

ii. To protect the infrastructures like canals, railway lines, roads, agricultural fields, human settlements from drifting sand.

¶26

iii. To conserve the gene-pool and improve the biodiversity of flora and fauna.

¶27

iv. To augment the availability of fuel-wood, fodder and minor forest products in the State.

¶28

v. To generate employment opportunities to the rural/tribal population, thus improving their socio-economic condition.

¶29

vi. To elicit peoples’ participation and involvement of institutions of Local Governance and other government departments to make this programme success.

¶30

vii. To achieve the goal of 20% of the geographical area under vegetal cover within reasonable time frame as envisaged by the State Forest Policy, 2010.

¶31

viii. To mitigate the climate change impacts and also to enhance the carbon stocks.

¶32

ix. To increase the supply of the organic matter in the form of leaf litter to maintain fertility, structure and water holding capacity of the soils to ensure food security.

¶33

x. NTFP/Biomass Based Community Livelihoods To encourage the local farmers for adopting agro forestry model, establishing the NTFP and Biomass based micro enterprises for sustainable use of usufructs.

¶34

¶35

O.A. No.83/2026(CZ) Tapeshwar Singh Bhati Vs. PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan Forest Department & Anr.

¶36

It is further argued that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Janu Chandra Waghmare and ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra, (AIR 1978 Bom 119), while explaining what constitutes the word 'forest', stated;

¶37

"21. The expression forest' in its normal and popular connotation includes all that goes with it, such as, trees with fruits on them, shrubs, bushes, woody vegetation, undergrowth, pastures, honeycombs attached to trees, juices dried on trees, things embedded in the earth like mines and quarries with their produce locked up in the land, wild and stray animals (excluding domestic animals like cows, buffalos, goats, sheep etc.) living in the forest; in other words, forest produce in its primary and natural state lying in the forest as well as wild animals living therein unquestionably go with the forest and there can be no dispute that such forest produce and such wild animals would be included in the concept of forest and the expression 'forests' as a legislative head would surely include within its compass all these things."

¶38

The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India, vide letter dated 30.11.2023 has directed and informed the Government of Rajasthan as follows:-

¶39

"Sub: Circular dated 9.06.2023 issued by the Government of Rajasthan streamlining the procedures for allowing non-forestry works in the plantations raised by the Forest Department in Government and community lands - reg. Sir,

¶40

I am directed to refer to the Government of Rajasthan's Circular No. F.1(4) Forest/96 Pt. dated 9.06.2023 on the above subject containing directions for use of plantations raised by the State Forest Department for non-forestry activities and to inform that provisions of the said circular were reviewed by the DGF&SS, MoEF&CC, New Delhi in a meeting held in the Ministry on 9.10.2023. After detailed deliberation, it was opined that the State Government is at liberty to formulate their procedure and modus operandi to undertake nonforestry works in the lands where the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 do not apply. However, keeping in view the provisions of the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016, rules and guidelines made thereunder which provide that funds realized in lieu of diversion of forest land for a particular project should be used

¶41

¶42

O.A. No.83/2026(CZ) Tapeshwar Singh Bhati Vs. PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan Forest Department & Anr.

¶43

for the mitigation measures prescribed in that area and under no circumstances diversion of such funds for carrying activities prescribed in other projects is permissible.

¶44

In view of the above, I am directed to request the State Government to ensure strict compliance of the provisions of the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act. 2016, rules and guidelines made thereunder and to ensure that funds from the State CAMPA shall be utilized only for mitigation measures, proposed under a project against which funds have been realized from the user agency, and under no circumstances these funds will be diverted for compensating the loss by allowing non-forestry use of plantations raised in the Government and community lands. Yours faithfully.

¶45

Charan Jeet Singh (Charan Jeet Singh) Scientist 'D' Date: 30-11-2023”

¶46

It is to be noted that Section 27 of the CAMPA fund provides and directs the state authorities to maintain proper account and other relevant records which is subject to audit and account by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India. The management of the National Fund, State Fund, Utilization and the prohibited activities are given in the notification dated 10.08.2018 by MoEF&CC which is as

¶47

follows:-

¶48

" 3. Management of National Fund . The National fund shall be managed according to the provisions of the Government Accounting Rule 1990 and the General Financial Rules, 2017 as applicable from time to time.

¶49

4. Management of State Fund. The State Fund shall be managed according to the provisions of the State Financial Rules or any such rules applicable from time to time in a State.

¶50

5. Manner of utilisation of net present value. -(1) The monies received towards net present value deposited in the State Fund shall be used in the manner provided in sub-rule (2) and sub-rule (3).

¶51

¶52

O.A. No.83/2026(CZ) Tapeshwar Singh Bhati Vs. PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan Forest Department & Anr.

¶53

(2) Not less than eighty per cent. of the monies referred to in subrule (1) shall be used for following activities for the forest and wildlife management in a State, namely:-

¶54

(a) assisted natural regeneration;

¶55

(b) artificial regeneration;

¶56

(c) silvicultural operations in forests;

¶57

(d) protection of plantations and forests;

¶58

(e) pest and disease control in forest;

¶59

(f) forest fire prevention and control operations;

¶60

(g) soil and moisture conservation works in the forest;

¶61

(h) voluntary relocation of villages from protected areas;

¶62

(i) improvement of wildlife habitat as provided in the approved wildlife management plan or working plan;

¶63

(j) planting and rejuvenation of forest cover on non-forest land falling in wildlife corridors;

¶64

(k) establishment, operation and maintenance of animal rescue centre and veterinary treatment facilities for wild animals;

¶65

(1) supply of wood-saving cooking appliances and other forest produce saving devices in forest fringe villages as specified by the National Authority from time to time;

¶66

(m) management of biological diversity and biological resource.

¶67

Εχρlαnαtion .-in cases where funds towards wildlife management and conservation plans are specifically collected and deposited in State Fund, then the same shall be spent for wildlife management in specified wildlife area and not from the net present value. (3) Not more than twenty per cent. of the monies referred to in sub-rule (1) shall be utilised for strengthening of the forest and wildlife related infrastructure, capacity building of the personnel involved in utilisation of State Fund namely: - (a) establishment, up-gradation and maintenance of modern nurseries and other planting stock production facilities for production of quality planting materials;

¶68

(b) promoting conservation, sustainable use and documentation of biological diversity including preservation of habitats, conservation of land and folk varieties and cultivars,

¶69

¶70

O.A. No.83/2026(CZ) Tapeshwar Singh Bhati Vs. PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan Forest Department & Anr.

¶71

domesticated stocks and breeds of animals and microorganisms and chronicling of knowledge relating to biological diversity.

¶72

(c) purchase and maintenance of equipment or devices used for communication and information technology for the purpose of protection of forest and wildlife;

¶73

(d) construction, up-gradation and maintenance of inspection paths, forest roads in forest area, fire lines, watch towers, check posts and timber depots;

¶74

(e) construction of residential and official buildings in forests for front line staffs deployed for protection of forest and wildlife;

¶75

(f) casual engagement of local people or labours to assist regular staff of State Forest Department for works for protection of forest and wildlife undertaken from State Fund; (g) survey and mapping of forest areas for forest fire control, compensatory afforestation works, soil and moisture conservation, catchment area treatment and wildlife management for preparing annual plans to be executed from the State Fund;

¶76

(h) independent concurrent monitoring and evaluation and third party monitoring of various works undertaken from State Fund;

¶77

(i) publicity-cum-awareness programme and exhibition on the various schemes being implemented by the State Authority from State Fund;

¶78

(j) production and distribution of quality planting material through certified nurseries at subsidised price for promotion of trees outside forests on Government lands promoted by State Government;

¶79

(k) forest certification and development of certification standards:

¶80

Provided that in case the activities referred to in sub rules (2) and (3) are to be undertaken in the forest land under the administrative control of the Forest Department of State Government, then the said activities shall be carried out as per the working plan:

¶81

¶82

O.A. No.83/2026(CZ) Tapeshwar Singh Bhati Vs. PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan Forest Department & Anr.

¶83

Provided further that the said activities over forest land under the control of State Forest Department of State Government and being managed as per the working plan shall be taken up in consultation with the Gram Sabha or Village Forest Management Committee, as the case may be, and shall be inconsonance with the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (2 of 2007) and the guidelines issued thereunder, wherever applicable:

¶84

Provided also that in case the said activities are to be undertaken in areas not covered by the approved working plan then activities referred to in sub rules (2) and (3)shall be taken up in consultation with concerned Gram Sabha or Village Forest Management Committee or any authority having jurisdiction over that area, as the case may be, and shall be in consonance with the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (2 of 2007) and guidelines issued thereunder, wherever applicable.

¶85

(4) The monies referred to in sub-rule (1) shall not be used for following activities, namely:-

¶86

(a) payment of salary, travelling allowances, medical expenses, etc. to regular, contractual and casual employees of the State Forest Department for implementing programmes in various forest divisions undertaken from the State Fund;

¶87

(b) undertaking foreign visits;

¶88

(c) payment for legal services for defending cases filed in Tribunals or Courts not related to the management of State Authority;

¶89

(d) purchase of vehicles or staff cars for officers and heavy vehicles and machines for the State Forest Department for implementing programmes in various forest divisions undertaken from the State Fund;

¶90

(e) construction of residential and official buildings for officers above the Forest Range Officer of the State Forest Department for implementing programmes in various forest divisions undertaken from the State Fund;

¶91

¶92

O.A. No.83/2026(CZ) Tapeshwar Singh Bhati Vs. PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan Forest Department & Anr.

¶93

(f) leasing, hiring and purchase of land for afforestation purposes;

¶94

(g) purchase of furniture, office equipment, fixtures including air conditioners, and generator sets for residences and offices of the State Forest Department for implementing programmes in various forest divisions undertaken from the State Fund;

¶95

(h) mandatory afforestation as per the working plan in the forest in blanks created by commercial felling of trees for revenue generation undertaken under working plan prescription;

¶96

(i) undertaking forest and wildlife conservation and other activities undertaken under other schemes of the Government for the purpose of part financing the scheme for completing left over works or complementary works of such schemes;

¶97

(j) establishment, expansion and up-gradation of zoo and wildlife safari;

¶98

(k) providing financial support, either by way of grant or equity to existing or for setting up new forest corporations, boards, etc."

¶99

It is further to be noted that the State of Rajasthan vide order dated 12.02.2019 has constituted governing body, steering committee and executive committee in accordance with the aforesaid act. Such power cannot be delegated again.

¶100

In view of the above facts, the State of Rajasthan has already constituted a Governing Body, steering Committee and Executing Committing with the power to make audit and inspection of the funds utilized for the CAMPA fund and accordingly it is a policy matter which is to be regulated by the notification and guidelines issued by the State of Rajasthan or the CAMPA Act.

¶101

We have also examined the prayer, since the preliminary enquiry has been conducted and show cause notice has been issued, thus, it is within the domain of the departmental enquiry and necessary actions are being initiated and taken by the Competent Authority. However, the

¶102

¶103

O.A. No.83/2026(CZ) Tapeshwar Singh Bhati Vs. PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan Forest Department & Anr.

¶104

administrative decisions have been taken by the authorities concerned and it should not be interfered with unless and until it is proved by the cogent evidence with regard to any violation of laws. It is settled position that the Courts/Tribunals should not ordinarily interfere with the policy decisions unless they are clearly illegal or unconstitutional, that too that can be challenged before the appropriate forum.

¶105

However, we direct the Secretary, Department of Environment, to call a report from the official concerned, PCCF, with regard to the progress of the enquiry and action taken by the competent authority. The Secretary Environment has to ensure proper audit and action taken on the enquiry report.

¶106

Audit and account with disciplinary action like – departmental enquiry, are not within the domain of the National Green Tribunal. With these observations, the Original Application No.83/2026(CZ) stands

¶107

disposed of .

¶108

Sheo Kumar Singh, JM

¶109

Dr. Prashant Gargava, EM

¶110

07^th April, 2026,

¶111

Original Application No.83/2026(CZ) AK

¶112

¶113

O.A. No.83/2026(CZ) Tapeshwar Singh Bhati Vs. PCCF (HoFF), Rajasthan Forest Department & Anr.

Tapeshwar Singh Bhati v. Pccf Hoff Rajasthan Forest Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tapeshwar Singh Bhati v. Pccf Hoff Rajasthan Forest Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepank Kumar Sharma vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Dhenupuri Housing Colony, Kannadasan Avenue, Seethalakshmi Nagar Welfare Association, a Registered Society, Rep by Its President, D.Ravi vs the Secretary, State Urban Development Department, Govt. of Tamil Nadu

Brackish Water Research Centre vs Ministry of Environment & Forest

Nitin Saxena vs State of Madhya Pradesh through Its Chief Secretary

News Item Titled Bhojpur Bangrasia Fourlane Sadak Nirmaan Shuru Pedo Ki Shifting Ke Naam Par Ho Rahi Katai Appearing in Nav Duniya News Paper Dated 31ST October 2025 vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Deepak Awasthi vs

Sanu Das vs State of Odisha

Rameez Hassin Warsi vs State of West Bengal

Nitin Saxena vs State of Madhya Pradesh through Its Chief Secretary

Mukesh Gaikwad S/O Shri Shivaji Gaikwad vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change through Deputy Director General of Forests

N Balasubramani vs the Joint Chief Controller of Explosives

News Item Titled Raipur Bhilai Va Korba Ki Hawa Kharab Panch Shal Me Do SHO Carod Kharch Phir Bhi Nahi Sudhari Appearing in Dainik Bhaskar Raipur Dated 20TH Nov 2025 vs State of Chattisgarh

Rupesh Patidar vs M.P Pollution Control Board

Babu Lal Jajoo Son of Shri Balu Ram Jajoo Aged About 61 Years vs the Chief Secretary