Dehradun Cantonment Board CEO Accuses District Magistrate of Harassment and Overreach
In a significant bureaucratic confrontation, the Chief Executive Officer of the Clementtown Cantonment Board, Ankita Singh, has formally approached the Chief Minister's office with serious allegations against Dehradun District Magistrate Savin Bansal. The complaint accuses the DM of "harassment, authoritarian conduct, and overstepping jurisdiction", creating a tense standoff between two senior administrative officials in Uttarakhand's capital.
Meeting Absences Trigger Escalating Conflict
The dispute originated from Singh's absence at two crucial census-related meetings scheduled for January 28 and January 31. According to sources within her office, no prior information was received regarding the first meeting, while for the second gathering, representatives from the cantonment board attended and provided all requested information. Notably, the CEO of Garhi Cantonment Board was also absent from both meetings, suggesting broader coordination issues.
Attempted Vehicle Confiscation Intensifies Tensions
The situation escalated dramatically when District Magistrate Bansal attempted to confiscate CEO Singh's official vehicle, invoking emergency powers under the Motor Vehicles Act. A source revealed that an email demanding confiscation arrived at 5:36 PM on Saturday, followed within minutes by a team from the Regional Transport Office and local police arriving at her office to seize the vehicle. When a second attempt was made on Monday, Singh refused compliance, asserting that the vehicle rightfully belonged to the Ministry of Defence.
In her formal complaint to the Chief Minister's office, Singh characterized these actions as "mental harassment and an encroachment of jurisdiction", specifically objecting to police and RTO officials being dispatched to the residence of a senior woman officer. She has since declined further public comment on the matter.
Administrative Response and Legal Ramifications
District Magistrate Savin Bansal could not be reached for comment regarding the allegations. However, the city magistrate's office offered perspective, stating that recalling government vehicles is routine administrative procedure, particularly for special requirements and VIP duties.
Sources familiar with the developments indicated that subordinate representatives sent by the Cantonment Board CEO to the meetings failed to provide necessary details, thereby delaying the demarcation of cantonment areas and stalling preliminary census work. Consequently, the Director of Census Operations recommended action under the Census Act of 1948.
The district administration and census director are now initiating proceedings under Sections 6, 7, and 11 of the Census Act, which carry provisions for imprisonment of up to one month for non-compliance. This legal dimension adds significant gravity to what began as an administrative disagreement.
Broader Implications for Governance
This confrontation highlights potential friction between civilian district administration and cantonment board authorities, both operating under different jurisdictional frameworks. The incident raises questions about:
- Protocol for inter-departmental communication
- Jurisdictional boundaries between civilian and defence administrative bodies
- Appropriate escalation procedures for bureaucratic disputes
- Gender dynamics in administrative conflicts involving senior women officers
As both offices await the Chief Minister's intervention, this standoff continues to unfold, potentially setting precedents for how similar conflicts between civilian and defence-linked administrative bodies are resolved in the future.
