By Arun Pratap Singh
Garhwal Post Bureau
Dehradun, 3 Feb: A tussle between two senior officers has gone viral on social media in Uttarakhand. A senior Central Government officer has lodged a formal complaint against the Dehradun District Magistrate, triggering a fresh controversy. Dehradun District Magistrate Savin Bansal, who often remains in the spotlight for his strict administrative decisions, is this time in the news not for an official order but for a complaint levelled against him by Ankita Singh, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Clement Town Cantonment Board. Singh has written a formal letter to Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami, alleging harassment and violation of jurisdiction by the district administration.
It may be recalled that the dispute relates to a meeting convened by the Dehradun DM, which Ankita Singh did not attend personally. Following her absence, DM Savin Bansal allegedly sent a team of the Regional Transport Office (RTO) along with police personnel to the residence of the CEO to seize her official vehicle, which is property of the Ministry of Defence. Describing the action as mental harassment and an encroachment upon jurisdiction, Singh has written to the CM complaining against the DM.
In her complaint letter to the CM, Singh has alleged that an administrative officer had resorted to authoritarian conduct by sending police and RTO teams to the residence of a senior woman officer. She termed the incident as harassment of a female employee of the Central Government and stated that neither the country nor the state was under Emergency, yet the DM invoked emergency powers under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1947, to order the seizure of her official vehicle. She further clarified that as far as the issue of participation in the Census-related meeting was concerned, she had deputed her representative to attend the meeting.
The CEO also stated in her letter that she is serving the Clement Town Cantonment Board, which is an autonomous body under the Ministry of Defence, and its jurisdiction is entirely different from that of the DM. She asserted that the DM has no authority to seize a vehicle belonging to the Defence Ministry and that the action clearly amounts to a violation of jurisdictional limits. She further alleged that the incident also reflected gender discrimination, claiming that there was an attempt to insult and undermine a woman officer.
Singh has further mentioned the Panchayat elections held in July, 2025 and alleged that she was deputed twice during the fifteen days for election duty without any training and in violation of the existing rules and further reminded that despite being a senior officer of 2015 batch, she was forced to work under a junior officer of 2017 cadre which, she claimed was an attempt to mentally harass her and insult her.
Throughout the day, media persons attempted to obtain the DM’s version on the issue, but Savin Bansal did not respond to queries and did not take phone calls. However, later in the evening, a clarification note was issued from the District Magistrate’s office.
In the clarification, the district administration stated that in view of the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs entering the advanced stage of the Census process, the DM has been designated as the Principal Census Officer. The Home Ministry expects that the appointment of Census Charge Officers, holding of regular meetings for area demarcation, inter-departmental coordination, preparation of programme outlines and appointment of subordinate staff are completed in a time-bound manner and progress is promptly reported to the Ministry.
The clarification further said that a joint meeting of the Director of Census Operations of the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Dehradun district administration was convened on 28 January, 2026. Despite being duly informed through written communication and over the telephone, the CEOs of Cantonment Board Garhi and Cantonment Board Clement Town did not attend the meeting, leading the Director of Census to express strong displeasure.
It was further stated in the explanation another meeting was convened on January 31, 2026, for which information had already been shared on 28 January. The ADM (Finance and Revenue) also personally contacted both cantonment board CEOs over the telephone, explaining the importance of the meeting and requesting their presence. Despite this, both officers again remained absent.
According to the district administration, due to the continued absence of the officers concerned, area demarcation of the cantonment areas could not be completed and preliminary Census-related work could not commence. Taking a serious view of the lapse, the Director of Census Operations, Ministry of Home Affairs, recommended action against the officers concerned under the Census Act, 1948. The Dehradun district administration stated that joint legal action is being initiated by the district administration and the Director of Census under Sections 6, 7 and 11 of the Census Act, 1948, which provide for imprisonment of up to one month.
Meanwhile, it is noteworthy that Defence Minister Rajnath Singh is scheduled to visit Uttarakhand in the coming days, during which this matter may also be brought to his notice and the complaint may be forwarded to him as well.
This is not the first time that Dehradun DM Savin Bansal has been embroiled in controversy. Earlier, during the visit of Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla, allegations of breach of privilege were levelled after it was claimed that calls from the Speaker’s staff were not attended to and proper protocol was not extended. On another occasion, the District Magistrate also faced criticism during a disaster situation in Dehradun over allegations of not responding to calls from Minister Ganesh Joshi. However, Bansal chose to respond to the charges through a statement this time, where he has explained the situation warranting the action by the DM.
