Inter Departmental Communications / File Notings Cannot Be Relied Upon As A Basis To Claim Any Right: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that inter-departmental communications cannot be relied upon as a basis to claim any right.

"Before something amounts to an order of the State Government, two things are necessary. First, the order has to be expressed in the name of the Governor as required by clause (1) of Article 166 and second, it has to be communicated.", the bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath observed.

Bheru Lal who was serving as a Sepoy in the Indian Army, was invalidated out of service after he suffered an injury on the right leg due to mine blast in the Indo-Pak war of 1965 which led to the amputation of his right foot. He applied for allotment of land in the category of disabled war personnel under Rajasthan Special Assistance to Disabled Ex Servicemen and Dependants of Deceased Defence Personnel (Allotment of Lands) Rules, 1963. The Soldier Welfare Section of the Revenue Department of the State sent a letter to the District Collector, Udaipur wherein it was conveyed that it has been decided to allot 25 Bighas in Village Rohikhera. After the death of Bheru Lal, his wife submitted a representation that the possession of the land has not been handed over either to her husband or to her. Later she filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court. The High Court directed to give possession of the land originally allotted.

In appeal, the Apex Court bench noted that there was no letter of allotment in favour of the writ petitioner and the inter-departmental communication cannot be treated to be a letter of allotment. The court said:

"It is well settled that inter-departmental communications are in the process of consideration for appropriate decision and cannot be relied upon as a basis to claim any right. This Court examined the said question in a judgment reported as Omkar Sinha v. Sahadat Khan. Reliance was placed on Bachhittar Singh v. State of Punjab to hold that merely writing something on the file does not amount to an order. Before something amounts to an order of the State Government, two things are necessary. First, the order has to be expressed in the name of the Governor as required by clause (1) of Article 166 and second, it has to be communicated. As already indicated, no formal order modifying the decision of the Revenue Secretary was ever made. Until such an order is drawn up, the State Government cannot, in our opinion, be regarded as bound by what was stated in the file."

Terming the High Court order as 'unfortunate, the bench set it aside and observed:

"The proceedings show an extra interest taken by the High Court, and not in respect of mere allotment of land but also of the land which was once allotted and is now close to the National Highway. The manner in which the matter has been dealt with by the High Court under the guise of help to disabled ex-serviceman is wholly unwarranted.. Therefore, we find that the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner is wholly misconceived, mischievous with collateral motives and may be having the patronage of the officers/officials."

Case details

Mahadeo vs Sovan Devi | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 730 | CA 5876 OF 2022 | 30 August 2022 | Justices Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath

Headnotes

Administrative Law - Inter-departmental communications cannot be relied upon as a basis to claim any right - Merely writing something on the file does not amount to an order. Before something amounts to an order of the State Government, two things are necessary. First, the order has to be expressed in the name of the Governor as required by clause (1) of Article 166 and second, it has to be communicated. (Para 14-15)

Click here to Read/Download Judgment