Tensions between IFS officer and lawyer in Uttarakhand, the Ministry of Legislation has requested the Supreme Court to take steps -Sanjeev Chaturvededi Legal Law Searching on Steps on IFS officials complaint

Jagran correspondent, Nainital. The Union Ministry wrote a letter to the General Registrar of the Nainital High Court requesting the appropriate steps requested by Sheev Chaturvedi, IFS official of Uttarakhand cader, placed in Haldwani, against a senior permanent advocate for central central. Chaturvedi, chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), LK a petition filed against Narasimha Reddy accused irregularities during his presence in the Supreme Court. The instructions issued to the General Registrar on August 28 contain a letter written by the Central Vigilance Commission to the Ministry of Rights on July 7, 2025, in which the commission requested the Ministry of Rights to take appropriate steps on the ChATURVEDI. The legal ministry also sent a detailed office memorandum to the Department of Staff and Training on August 25 to investigate various issues raised by Sheev Chaturvedi. The office memorandum sent by the register minister said that the then cat president was represented by a senior permanent lawyer in the central in the petition in the High Court, while at the same time as a panel advocate of the Government of India before the same chairman (CAT) in Delhi. According to the Ministry of Rights and Justice, the permanent lawyer for the hearing on March 23, 2021 also received an approval of £ 50,000 and a taxi tariff of £ 40.910, while no hearing was held on that day. Chaturvedi, while submitting a record in the Supreme Court, made it clear that no action was taken on the petition on March 23, 2021. In December 2020, ChaturVedi filed a petition in the Supreme Court in which the order of the then chairman of CAT, Reddy, in which the trial of his case was transferred was transferred from Nainital Bench to Delhi Bench. In October 2021, the Supreme Court ended the order, saying that the tribunal did not consider the problems of the requester. He appeared before the chairman of the cat as a lawyer of the staff and training department for the trial of the transfer request filed by the Department of Staff and Training, and even when the CAT chairman was disputed in the Supreme Court, he was still present in the Uttarakhand High Court as the chairman of the chairman of the same cat.