Allahabad High Court Orders Inquiry Against SDO For Passing Two 'Contrast' Orders In Same Case

The Allahabad High Court has recently directed a high-level inquiry to be conducted by the Principal Secretary (Revenue), U.P. Government, Lucknow against the Sub-Divisional Officer, Deoria who passed two contrasting orders in the same matter.Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Collector, Deoria to inspect the case filed by him under Section 31/32 of U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 as two final orders had been passed in his case on the same day. The instructions furnished before the Court revealed that though two different orders were passed on the same day, the one not containing the signature of the Sub-Divisional Officer, namely, Sri Yogesh Kumar Gaur was erroneously uploaded on the website of Board of Revenue, i.e. R.C.M.S. portal. It was submitted that this order was later deleted from the website and the other order was uploaded. The bench comprising Justice Kshitij Shailendra observed that the two orders passed were in complete contrast with each other. “in one of the orders, the claim of the petitioner Shiv Narayan Tiwari has been accepted and direction for correction of entries has been issued, whereas in the second order of the same date, the petitioner's case has been dismissed on merits recording finding that there is no justification to correct entries.”Further, the Court observed that though inquiry had been initiated against the Reader and the Revenue Ahalmad working in the office of Sub-Divisional Officer, no inquiry had been set up against the Sub-Divisional Officer. Taking judicial notice of the fact that no order can be uploaded on or deleted from the concerned website without directions or knowledge of the officer concerned, the Court directed that a detailed inquiry be conducted against the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sri Yogesh Kumar Gaur. Regarding the role of the Reader and the Revenue Ahalmad in pronouncing the orders, the Court observed that “neither a Reader of the Court nor Revenue Ahalmad can have any role in pronouncing two different orders on merits in the same case. At the most, their duties/ responsibilities can be confined to ministerial/ administrative work but certainly not to exercise judicial/ quasi judicial function.”Accordingly, the Court directed the Collector, Deoria to call upon the erring officer and submit his written defence. The Collector shall prepare his own independent report and submit it before the Principal Secretary (Revenue), U.P. Government who shall conduct a high-level inquiry against the Sub-Divisional Officer. The case is directed to be listed on 1st July, 2024. Case Title: Shiv Narayan Tiwari v. State Of U.P. And 7 Others [WRIT - C No. - 38509 of 2023]Click Here To Read/Download Order

Allahabad High Court Orders Inquiry Against SDO For Passing Two 'Contrast' Orders In Same Case

Upasna Agrawal

Tags