'Utter Ignorance': MP High Court Imposes ₹1 Lakh Costs On Indore Municipal Officer For Passing Order Under Repealed Provisions

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has imposed costs of ₹1 Lakh on an erring officer of the Indore Municipal Corporation for passing an order by relying on statutory provisions that were omitted in 2020. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 436]

Observing that the incident reflected the officer's "utter ignorance" of the law and wasted precious judicial time, the bench of Justice Sandeep N Bhatt directed:

"It is painful to note that the respondent authority, who is the statutory authority under the Municipal Corporation Act is required to discharge duty to adjudicate the proceedings which are coming before the authority, in accordance with law within the four corners of law and on the basis of existing provisions of law. In the present case, Section 143,146 and 153 of the Municipal Corporation Act which stood omitted in the year 2020 are relied upon and thereafter, the order was passed. This shows utter ignorance of the responsible officer who is duty bound to adjudicate the grievance of the concerned person strictly in accordance with law. This situation is clearly disappointing and painful which is not required to be repeated in future". 

A petition by filed by a hospital challenging the order of September 30, 2026 along with subsequently ledger report of October 7, 2026 issued by Indore Municipal Corporation (IMC). 

During the proceedings, the corporation's senior counsel submitted that the impugned order was bad in law and could be treated as non-est. The corporation accordingly agreed to withdraw the order and subsequent ledger report. 

Although the court accepted the submission and allowed withdrawal of the order, the court also expressed reluctance to take a lenient view of the matter. The bench noted that the order was passed mechanically without proper application of mind. 

The court emphasized that the error could not be overlooked merely because the Corporation had agreed to withdraw the impugned order. Thus, the bench directed:

"Considering all these aspects and with a view to set an example, so that in future all the concerned officers of the statutory authorities like the present respondent shall also take all precautions as normally they are filing litigation at the cost of public money, it is a fit case where exemplary cost of Rs. 1,00,000/-  (Rupees One Lac) is required to be imposed on the erring officer for wasting the judicial time of this Court by passing such order, relying on the irrelevant or non-existing provisions by the authority who is responsible to adjudicate the proceedings". 

The bench clarified that the amount of ₹75,000 is to be deposited with the MP State Legal Services Authority and the remaining ₹25,000 to be paid to the petitioner towards litigation costs. 

Accordingly, the petition was disposed of. 

For Petitioner: Advocates Vibhor Khandelwal and Jayesh Gurnani

For Respondent: Senior Advocate Manoj Munshi with Advocates Shashank Shrivastava and Vikram Malviya