02.17.2011 · Posted in All

In a classic case of corruption, where one IFS Joint Secretary of R&FD Mumbai demanded a bribe of Rs 10 lacs from an IFS officer, a complaint has been filed with Lokayukta Maharashtra against Rajendra Mangarulkar and J.P. Dange,  ex chief Secretary, Maharashtra (see para 5 of the complaint). The Lokayukta has taken cognisance of the matter. The Government of Maharashtra has been moved to grant permision to prosecute JP Dange IAS, Leela Satya Narayan IAS, Johny Joseph IAS, SS Hussain IAS,  Dod IAS, D.K. Shankaran IAS,  Satish Tripathi IAS,  Navin Kumar , Chitkala Jutshi IAS &  Rajendra Mangarulkar IFS for offences of sec 166, 177, 182, 463, 469, 470 and 35 of Indian Penal code. Sanction for prosecution is still awaited. Reliable sources have informed that file is pending with L&JD of Mantralaya, Mumbai.

The case is related to Navin Singh, who is an officer of Indian Forest Service, 1983 batch of Maharashtra cadre, who has been rated to be an outstanding officer in his last available five successive ACRs . The Government of Maharashtra vide order no. AFO 1301/CR128/F-7 dated 13-1-2003 has placed him under suspension, under Rule 3(1) of All India Services (D&A) Rules 1969, framed under the provision of All India Services Act, 1951.

2. His suspension order was required to be reviewed and extended by the competent authority within 90 days of suspension order, if government wanted to further review and extend it as per the provisions of Rule 3(8) (a) . The said Rule 3(8) provides and authorises the Competent authority to extend a suspension order for a further period of not more than 180 days provided it has been extended within initial 90 days of suspension.

3. Rule 3(8) also provides that if suspension order is not extended within said stipulated period then it becomes invalid. Hence can not be extended anymore.

4. As per Rules of business of State Government, competent authority for All India Services officers (IAS, IPS & IFS) is Hon’ble Chief Minister of the State, who is a public servant within the meaning of Indian Penal Code.

5. The Rule 3 (1) and 3(8) of AIS (D&A) Rules, 1969 reads as follows :

  • “3. Suspension.- (1) If, having regard to the circumstances in any case and, where articles of charge have been drawn up, the nature of the charges, the Government of a State or the Central Government, as the case may be, is satisfied that it is necessary or desirable to place under suspension a member of the Service, against whom disciplinary proceedings are contemplated or are pending, that Government may-
  • 3(1)(a) if the member of the Service is serving under that Government, pass an order placingunder suspension, or
  • 3(1)(b) if the member of the Service is serving under another Government request that Government to placeunder suspension, pending the conclusion of the disciplinaryproceedings and the passing of the final order in the case.
  • 3 (8)(a) An order of suspension made under this rule which has not been extended shall be valid for a period not exceeding ninety days and an order of suspension which has been extended shall remain valid for a further period not exceeding one hundred eighty days, at a time, unless revoked earlier.
  • 3(8)(b) An order of suspension made or deemed to have been made or continued, shall be reviewed by the competent authority on the recommendations of the concerned Review Committee.
  • 3(8)(c) The composition and functions of the Review Committees and the procedure to be followed by them shall be as specified in the Schedule annexed to these rules.
  • 3(8)(d) The period of suspension under sub rule (1) may, on the recommendations of the concerned Review Committee, be extended for a further period not exceeding one hundred and eighty days at a time: Provided that where no order has been assed under this clause, the order of suspension shall stand revoked with effect from the date of expiry of the order being reviewed.

6. After placing him under suspension on 13-1-2003, his suspension was extended for the first time by order dated 24-4-2003, i.e. after 101 days from suspension date. As per rule 3(8)(a), the first extension was statutorily required to be done before 13-4-2003 (within 90 days of suspension order). Because no extension of suspension was done in 90 days of suspension, as required by law, his suspension order stood revoked on 13th April 2003. But instead of issuing his reinstatement order after deemed-revocation, Government on the contrary issued an extension order after 101 days. This act of administration was not only unreasonable, unjust , oppressive but also invalid, illegal, and without authority of law.

7. Further, the government has extended his invalid/illegal suspension by order dated 8-10-2003 for 180 days. When the rules are so clear that this extension can not be granted until and unless the original suspension order has been extended within 90 days of issuance , still by abusing the power, he is being kept under suspension without any authority, legality and validity. (Government order no. AFO 1301/CR 128 (Part III-B)/F-7, dated 18-6-2008). Criminality, Falsification & Forgery with documents has been committed by  IFS Joint Secretary ,  Rajendra Mangarulkar. As has been complained by Navin Singh to Lokayukta , Maharashtra , for reinstating him into service (though as per law his suspension was revoked on 14th April 2003), Rajendra Mangarulkar demanded Rs 10,00,000/- as bribe so that  a proper note would be written in the file explaining the provisions of law , which will result in his immediate reinstatement in the service.

8. After his suspension, Government of Maharashtra was issuing the extension orders of suspension by 180 days, by issuing government orders. It was shocking to see:•

  • that to keep him under continuous suspension, a criminal conspiracy was hatched by the officers of Mantralaya, who had not only reviewed his suspension orders without authority ( as there is no authority to review of suspension under AIS (D&A) Rules , if suspension order is not extended either in initial 90 days of suspension or if it has been extended within 90 days then within 180 days of review),
  • but issued the purporting to be government orders (competent authority) of extension of his suspension by 180 days without government sanctions on the date it was issued. Thus, by issuing fabricated government orders (GRs) they kept him under suspension since 13th April 2003.
  1. To show you some of the forgeries committed by these officers, according to then Principal Secretary, R&FD  Leela Satyanarayan, the extension order of suspension was required to be issued by competent authority before 25-3-06. Hence a review comittee was organised who has reviewed suspension on 24-3-06. The file was cleared by Forest Minister on 27-3-06 and it came back to Leela Satyanarayan on 14-4-2006 from the office of Chief Minister on his approval. File was sent to Rajendra Mangarulkar on 15-4-2006. Mangarulkar has issued a back dated  GR dated 24-3-2006. It can very easily be understood that the file was cleared by competent authoiry (CM) inbetween 27-3-2006 to 15-4-2006. The file came back to Mangarulkar on 15-4-2006, but still Government resolution extending suspension  was issued on 24-3-06 . Had this forged GR not issued on 24-3-06 , again the status of suspension would have become REVOKED as per Rules.
  2. To show you some more of the forgeries committed by these officers, according to then Principal Secretary, R&FD  S. S. Hussain, the extension order of suspension was required to be issued by competent authority before 21-9-06. Hence a review comittee was organised by circulation . Every member including Chief Secretary has signed the file on 21-9-2006. The file was cleared by Forest Minister on 27-9-2006 and it came back to S.S. Hussain 5-10-06 from the office of Chief Minister after his approval. File was sent to Rajendra Mangarulkar on 5-10-2006. Mangarulkar has issued a back dated  GR dated 21-9-2006. It can very easily be understood that the file was cleared by competent authoiry (CM) inbetween 27-9-2006 to 5-10-2006. The file came back to Mangarulkar on 5-10-2006, but still Government resolution extending suspension  was issued on 21-9-06. Had this forged GR not issued on 21-9-06 , again the status of suspension would have become REVOKED as per Rules.

  • Also these officers, in no review-committees proceedings have brought these provisions of Rules to the notice of the Government ( Hon’ble Chief Minister and Hon’ble Minister) and by hiding these provisions of law from them, used his (Hon’ble C.M.) authority to harm him.
  • Since it was necessary as per law to issue his extension order of suspension within stipulated period , these officers in a criminal conspiracy issued the GR extending his suspension without it being approved by the Gcompetent authority i.e. Hon’ble Chief Minister. It can be seen from the records that no where even a ex-post facto approval had been taken for the dates on which these fabricated GRs had been issued. • It is very important to note that this was done not only at one occasion but at many occasions by these officers. Attached table would summarize the actual forgery and illegality committed by the said officers in reviews and illegal extensions of his suspension order.

It can be seen that not only back-dated, unauthorized, purported to be sanctioned by competent authority and forged orders were issued by these officers, but a very careful reading of the table shows that one of the meeting of illegal review committee was held on 21st September 08, it’s minutes were approved by Hon’ble Chief Minister on 1st October 2008, but order of extension was issued on 4th March 09 by Mr Rajendra Mangarulkar. Because of this non-issuance of order, pay and accounts department had not issued  subsistence allowance letter of Navin Singh for almost more than one year.

What Government should do :

  1. If such back dated GRs can be issued OR if such forged GRs can be issued without government sanction on the date of issue, then any thing under the sun is possible. No wonder if ADARSH ghotala can be saved in the similar manner. Hence GRs , which are public documents and are not required to be proved in the courts until and unless it can be challenged on grounds of their forged nature,  then persons involved in such cases should be prosecuted at once.
  2. Rajendra Mangarulkar should be suspended from the service and departmental enquiry should be initiated for major penalty under the provisions of AIS (D&A) Rules.
  3. All such cases must be inquired, as to in how many other cases, Rajendra Mangarulkar had issued such back dated, unauthorised and forged Government Resolutions for making corrupt money.
  4. Chief Secretary must device an internal mechanism to make fool proof system to avoid such serious criminal misconduct by officers.




  1. One of the CCF Nagpur says:

    This is a very dangerous case where forged GRs are issued by one of our service-mate. I do not know the truth about demanding bribe of Rs 10 lacs, but all the circumstances and needle of suspicion point towards Mangarulkar after going through “notes of the file”. It is really very unfortunate that our PCCFs/HOFF who should have informed government about such blatant violations of Rules, kept on sleeping. I hope this time association and HOFF both will take appropriate action in the matter.

  2. Boss Nagpur says:

    This case has brought shame to the service. Now we understand how grouping in the service played havoc, which led to such atmosphere of mistrust. HOFF must take appropriate measures to stop such malpractice.

  3. Nothing new. Mangarulkar can not sit without liquor even during office hours. He was a very good officer, but 3 Ws have played serious role in his life. We wish he should introspect and do good for the service. Everyone of us know that cadre management of IFS was ruined by him and two other officers of the department. HOFF can not take any action in this matter knowing his caliber and attitude.

    • poorforestofficer says:

      Who are those two other officers who have ruined the cadre management ? Please name them so that they should also know that people know their real character.

  4. Another CCF Maharashtra says:

    Yes…. It is dangerous. Now it is clear how Joint Secretaries play such dirty roles. Talibaan style se inko punishment dena chaahiye. Keeping us pending for promotion is Pradeep Kumar. Most inefficient JS of R&FD history. Let him come back to department for his farewell.

  5. HOFF kya ghaas khane ke liye baithe hain. Sharm nahi aati kya ? Kewal bakwaas kee baat karte hain. Baat karo forest kee jawab hoga cricket kaa. We have to wait for three years . MY God !!!!!!!!!!!!! Sir, Kindly give some time to IFS and other cadre of Forest also.

  6. How can government allow such criminal misconduct ? It is very good that some one has shown IAS the real place. I am sure Government will not allow their prosecution.

  7. Advocate Forester says:

    Navin… yaar go under section 156(3) of CrPC against these idiots , so that CJM/JMFC can directly direct lodging FIR to relevant police station’s SHO. And there is no need to take permission for sanction against retired officials. Prosecute them directly.

  8. Forest officer Chanda says:

    Sir, aise officers ko kapade utaar kar maarna chaahiye.

  9. One amongst you says:

    I am sure Mangarulkar must have secured all his integrity certificates beyound doubt and his ACRs …outstanding. There is grape wine that he is coming as CCF Nagpur.

  10. Corruption In Maharashtra says:

    Dear Readers,
    We know that many of you are very perturbed by such articles with hard evidences, but we again request you to kindly be objective in writing comments about senior officers. We are very sorry, we are not in a position to publish many comments because of their abusive language. Right to freedom of speech should also be exercised with some restraints.

  11. Also inform about progress of sanction to prosecution. All extension letters were marked to PCCF office. When such illegal first extension was done after 101 days then why PCCF has not written to the government about such illegality ? And ask for revokation of order.

  12. Weak and partisan head of the department makes the service look like gareeb kee wife.

  13. Though it is very sad to see this incident wherein persons in power are hitting below the belt. I feel, for service faternity we should take lessons from IAS officers. We should not get involved in infighting. You never know who can harm to what extent. I also advice administrator of this website to be little more careful in publishing the cases since he must not get be used by others.

  14. But the prime question is that in many sensitive cases like Bamboo rate fixation, Thane land cases, Pune land matters, Lavasa, Amby valley, Ercon , Indall everywhere it was Mangarulkar. It would be appropriate if government takes a closer look of related files. I can guarantee that every where his frauds would be there. Every evening of Mangarulkar used to be in five star hotels with private companies representatives , when he was joint secretary.

  15. CCF from Nagpur says:

    Mangrulkar never performed his duties without bribe. where ever he posted he created havoc and corruption of highest order. Government must constitute enquiry against him for his total service period that will be a milestone to stop corruption. It will be lesson for others.

  16. HOFF neighbour says:

    HOFF Mr Joshi… I have gone through this complete article with hard core documentary evidences & sufficient to take Mangarulkar to Jail. I feel this case is being treated by you as a case against individual. But the fact is that it should be a case study . Since the case is also marked to you and you are not taking any action in this matter by taking shield of “government should take action in this matter” ( which you once uttered in your chamber in front of two officers), I feel it is a fit case where you should also be prosecuted for not taking any action in a offences, which are cognisable in nature.

    You must realise that HOFF is head of the IFS family. He should immediately recommend action in this matter. Why are you affraid of Mangarulkar ? Is it because several IAS officers are involved in this matter ? Just imagine…it is with Navin Singh, who does not need service, and is out of service by choice. But had it been against other IFS officer then…..

    Maharashtra cadre IFS need Navin Singh type of officer back in the cadre. He should be persuaded to come back to department.

  17. It is a blatant case of caste factor in Maharashtra forest deptt.The kayastha-brahmin lobby is still active in MFD.They have heroes like Mangrulkar and Kakodkar working for their intrest in Mantralaya.With the help of Uttaranchal Brahmins like Joshis, Pant, Nandkishor, Saxena in PCCF office and Maharashtriyan Brahmins joining them, no wonder they can get away with anything.

  18. I suggest to impliment an organisetion like SEBI for Cooprative Housing societise or for entire coopration department so we (aam-aadmi) can approch with our complaints, now a days we have to go to various courts and than finnly to concerned minister and than again to court comlaints never end. than it ends with depretion or converted in a mafia-building.
    It’s because ever increasing rate and becoming outreach of a comma-man.
    It becoming of replicas of RAJYA-SABHA/LOK-SABHA (NUMBER-GAME)
    thank u

Leave a Reply