New Delhi: Refuting the Assam government’s claim that personnel of the Assam Forest Protection Force (AFPF) are not forest officers, the National Green Tribunal on Wednesday (April 8) upheld its order that forest personnel should not be delegated for election duties in the Assam elections.

Petitioner Gaurav Bansal, a lawyer, had contested an Assam government order seeking to deploy the forest personnel for election duty, saying it violated the Biological Diversity Act (BDA) of 2002 and a Supreme Court order in 2024.

“Not forest officers”

On April 8, the Assam government argued that personnel of the AFPF are not considered forest officers as per the Assam Forest Protection Force Act, 1986, and that a member of the AFPF Battalion qualifies as an armed personnel such as constable, lance naik, naik, havilder, sub inspector and inspector and not a “forest officer”.

The state government also said that there is a Special Rhino Protection Force for Kaziranga National Park and Tiger Reserve, with a strength of 90 personnel. “This team is well armed and dedicated for the protection of Kaziranga NP. This team is intact in Kaziranga NP and is not allotted with any other duties, unlike AFPF,” it claimed.

It also said that biological diversity is not just confined to the forests and protected areas of Assam, and that while notified forests in the State occupies 27.24% of the total area of the state, biodiversity is “equally abundant in rest of the areas of the State as well”.

The state also argued that the BDA, 2002 has no jurisdiction over the manpower deployment of forces, and that the petitioner’s claim was “completely false and misleading”.

The petitioner had “stretched the provisions of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 too far”, the state claimed.

The Assam government had also argued that personnel at the AFPF have been designated for government duty in the past. “There are earlier occasions wherein deployments of AFPF personnel have been made without compromising need for maintaining biodiversity to assist the Assam Police. It is completely wrong on the part of the petitioner to say that protection of Biological Diversity is dependent only on these 1600 AFPF personnel,” the state argued.

“Have to be treated as forest staff”

However the NGT did not buy the arguments.

“Any precedent in the past for their deployment for some other purpose cannot justify such deployment now or even in future,” the NGT said in its order dated April 8.

While members of the AFPF do not fall within the definition of “forest officers” under the AFPF Act, 1986, their appointment rests with the Chief Conservator of Forests, who has to exercise that power in accordance with the rules made under the Act, the NGT said.

“In view of the mode of appointment, maintenance of discipline and disbursement of salary and grant of other financial benefits by the Forest Department, the members of the Assam Forest Protection Force, being employees of the Forest Department, have to be treated/considered to fall within the fold of expression 'forest staff' and restriction imposed by Hon’ble Supreme Court for non-deployment of the 'forest staff' for election duties will be applicable to them,” the NGT observed.

The Act does not permit employment for other purposes, and employing AFPF personnel elsewhere “will defeat the very purpose of constitution” of the Protection Force, the NGT held.

It thus overruled the state’s arguments and upheld its previous order that stayed AFPF personnel from being deployed for election duty, citing that this was as per the BDA, 2002, and the Supreme Court order in 2024.

The next hearing in this matter has been scheduled for May 20.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.