Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sanjay Dwivedi, J.
Kailash Bundela v. State of M. P. & Others
Writ Petition No. 4820 of 2023 (Jabalpur);
Decided on 11.11.2024.
¼1½ Òw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-ç-½ && èkkjk 165 ¼6½ rFkk 165 ¼7½ && vij dysDVj }kjk foØ; dh vuqefr çnku dh xà && mls vkj¨ii= tkjh fd;k x;k fd vuqefr lE;d~ çfØ;k dk vuqlj.k fd, fcuk çnku dh xà gS rFkk og l{ke ugÈ Fkk && vfHkfu/kkZfjr && ftl le; og vij dysDVj dk in èkkj.k fd, Fkk rc mls vuqefr dh bZIlk d¢ ekey¨a dh lquokà dk drZO; lkSaik x;k Fkk && dysDVj esa vij dysDVj lfEefyr gS && dysDVj d¨ lkSais x, drZO;¨a dk ikyu djus d¢ fy, vij dysDVj iw.kZr% l{ke gSA çdh.kZ ;kfpdk Øekad 3679 lu~ 2021 fu.kÊr fnukad 3-10-2023] fjV ;kfpdk Øekad 234 lu~ 2024 fu.kÊr fnukad 13-9-2024 ¼[kaM U;k;ihB½ voyafcrA ¼iSjk 15 ,oa 16
¼2½ Òw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-ç-½ && èkkjk 17 rFkk 11 && vij dysDVj }kjk dysDVj dh 'kfä;ksa dk ç;ksx && dysDVj esa vij dysDVj lfEefyr gS && èkkjk 11 rFkk 17 d¢ micaèk¨a ls Li"V gS fd dysDVj d¨ lkSais x, drZO;¨a dk ikyu djus d¢ fy, vij dysDVj iw.kZr% l{ke gSA ¼iSjk 15 ,oa 16
¼3½ U;k;kèkh'k laj{k.k vfèkfu;e] 1985 && èkkjk 2 rFkk 3¼2½ && e-ç- Òw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 && èkkjk 165¼6½ rFkk 165¼7½ && vij dysDVj }kjk lafgrk dh èkkjk 165¼6½ rFkk 165¼7½ d¢ vèkhu foØ; dh vuqefr çnku dh xà && D;k og] mls U;k;kèkh'k ekurs gq,] 1985 d¢ vfèkfu;e d¢ vèkhu laj{k.k dk gdnkj gS && ^U;k;kèkh'k^ dh ifjÒk"kk ls Li"V gS fd blesa U;k;kèkh'k gh ugha] cfYd vius inh; ;k U;kf;d drZO; d¢ fuoZgu esa dk;Z djus okyk ;k U;kf;ddYi vfèkdkjh d¢ :i esa dk;Z djus okyk vfèkdkjh Òh lfEefyr gS && lafgrk dh èkkjk 165¼6½ rFkk 165¼7½ d¢ vèkhu vkosnu dk fofu'p;u djuk U;kf;ddYi dk;Zokgh gS && vr%] 1985 d¢ vfèkfu;e d¢ vèkhu vij dysDVj Òh laj{k.k dk gdnkj gSA fjV ;kfpdk Ø- 23674 lu~ 2023 fu.kÊr fnukad 21-5-2024 rFkk çdh.kZ ;kfpdk Øekad 3679 lu~ 2021 fu.kÊr fnukad 3-10-2023 voyafcrA vkb,yvkj ¼2011½2] ,eih 3019] 2022 ¼1½ ,eih,yts 414] ¼1996½ 11 ,llhlh 498] ¼2012½ 11 ,llhlh 565] ¼2006½ 5 ,llhlh 680] ¼1993½ 2 ,llhlh 56 rFkk 2015 ¼1½ ,eih,yts 372 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 18] 19 ,oa 22
¼4½ Òw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-ç-½ && èkkjk 165¼6½ rFkk 165¼7½ && vij dysDVj }kjk foØ; dh vuqefr çnku dh xà && D;k mld¢ fo#) vkj¨ii= tkjh fd;k tk ldrk gS && vkfFkZd vijk/k çdks"B ,oa y¨dk;qä ds le{k foÒkxh; tk¡p esa ik;k x;k fd vij dysDVj }kjk vkosnu dk fofu'p;u fdlh ijks{k gsrq ds fcuk vFkok fdlh O;fäxr ykÒ ;k ljdkjh [ktkus d¨ foÙkh; gkfu igq¡pk, fcuk fd;k x;k Fkk && vr%] ;kph d¢ fo#) vuq'kklukRed dk;Zokgh lafLFkr djuk Li"V :i ls voSèk v©j euekuk gS rFkk mlls mls çnÙk laj{k.k dk vfrØe.k gksrk gS && vkj¨ii= vfÒ[kafMr && çR;FkÊ çkfèkdkfj;¨a d¨ funs'k fn;k x;k fd ;fn ;kph vU;Fkk ik= gS rks Hkkjrh; ç'kklfud lsok d¢ in ij ç¨Uufr d¢ fy, vH;FkhZ ds :i esa ml ij fopkj fd;k tk,A ¼iSjk 20 ls 24
(1) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M. P.) -- S. 165(6) and 165(7) -- permission to sell granted by Additional Collector -- chargesheet issued to him that permission was given without following due procedure and he was not competent -- whether Additional Collector was competent to act as Collector to grant permission -- held -- while he was holding post of Additional Collector, duty was assigned to him to hear matters regarding seeking of permission -- Collector includes Additional Collector -- Additional Collector has every competence to perform duties assigned to Collector. M. P. No. 3679 of 2021 decided on 3.10.2023, W. A. No. 234 of 2024 decided on 13.9.2024 (DB) relied on. [Paras 15 & 16
(2) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M. P.) -- Ss. 17 and 11 -- exercise of powers of Collector by Additional Collector -- Collector includes Additional Collector -- provisions of sections 11 and 17 make it clear that Additional Collector has every competence to perform duties assigned to Collector. [Paras 15 & 16
(3) Judges Protection Act, 1985 -- Ss. 2 and 3(2) -- M. P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 -- S. 165(6) and 165(7) -- permission to sell granted by Additional Collector under section 165(6) and 165(7) of Code -- whether he was entitled to protection under Act of 1985 treating him as a Judge -- it is clear from definition of 'Judge' that it includes not only Judge but also officer acting or purporting to act in discharge of his official or judicial duty or functioning as a quasi-judicial officer -- deciding application under section 165(6) and 165(7) of Code is a quasi-judicial proceeding -- thus, Additional Collector is also entitled to protection under Act of 1985. W. P. No. 23674 of 2023 decided on 21.5.2024 and M. P. No. 3679 of 2021 decided on 3.10.2023 relied on. ILR [2011] MP 3019, 2022 (1) MPLJ 414, (1996) 11 SCC 498, (2012) 11 SCC 565, (2006) 5 SCC 680, (1993) 2 SCC 56 and 2015 (1) MPLJ 372 referred to. [Paras 18, 19 & 22
(4) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M. P.) -- S. 165(6) and 165(7) -- permission to sell granted by Additional Collector -- whether chargesheet can be issued against him -- in departmental enquiry before EOW and Lokyukt, it was found that application was decided by Additional Collector without any oblique motive, or without any personal profit or financial loss to Government exchequer -- thus, initiating disciplinary proceedings against petitioner apparently illegal, arbitrary and in violation of protection provided to him -- chargesheet quashed -- respondent authorities directed that petitioner be considered to be a candidate for promotion to post of IAS if he is otherwise eligible. [Paras 20 to 24
ORDER
1. This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed seeking quashing of order rejecting the request of petitioner for not initiating departmental enquiry and also for quashing of chargesheet dated 29.4.2019 (Annexure P/9).
2. The petitioner, at the time of discharging his duties as Additional Collector granted permission exercising the power provided under sections 165(6) and 165(7-b) of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for brevity ‘Code of 1959’) and it is alleged that the said permission has been given by the petitioner by not following the due procedure and thereby causing loss to the Government exchequer and it is also alleged that he was not competent to grant such permission, and as such, chargesheet was issued to the petitioner containing as many as 13 charges. After issuing chargesheet, an enquiry was initiated against the petitioner which was challenged by him by filing this petition but no interim order has been granted to him and the departmental proceeding is still going on.
3. As per learned counsel for the State, the prosecution witnesses have been examined and defendants are to be examined and thereafter final order would be passed.
4. Although, Shri Agrawal, has assailed the action of the respondents mainly on the ground that the chargesheet issued by the respondents is illegal for the reason that the petitioner is protected under the provisions of The Judges (Protection) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 1985’). He has submitted that the State Government has also issued a circular dated 25.3.2021 (Annexure P/10) whereby the revenue officers have also been considered to be a ‘Judge’ as per Section (2) of the Act of 1985 and as such, the proceeding which is said to be illegal and initiated by the petitioner granting permission under section 165 cannot be subjected to a disciplinary proceeding. He has also submitted that the enquiry can be initiated only when there is any oblique motive of the authority in granting permission or exercising power under section 165 of the Code of 1959 but according to him in this case, EOW has also conducted an enquiry and submitted its report clarifying that there was no oblique motive available with the petitioner while performing the duties as Additional Collector and granting permission under section 165 of the Code of 1959. It is also clarified that no financial loss has been caused to the Government Exchequer due to such action of the petitioner and as such, Shri Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no occasion for issuing any chargesheet or subjecting the petitioner to disciplinary proceeding.
5. Shri Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner further submits with regard to competency of the petitioner, as he was at the relevant point of time holding the post of Additional Collector, it is alleged that power of granting permission under Section 165 of the Code of 1959 is vested with the Collector only and even under the work distribution order, the said exercise cannot be exercised by the Additional Collector. Shri Agrawal submits that this point has already been settled by the Indore Bench vide order dated 3.10.2023 passed in W.P. No.3679 of 2021 that the Additional Collector can also exercise powers granting permission under section 165 pursuant to section 11 of the Code of 1959. He has also submitted that the issue in respect of initiating disciplinary proceeding or any criminal proceeding against the revenue authorities, who are provided protection, has already been dealt with and decided by the Indore Bench in W.P. No. 23674 of 2023 on 21.5.2024 that no such proceeding can be initiated against the revenue officers and accordingly, petitioner submits that present proceeding is illegal and contrary to law, therefore, the same deserves to be set aside.
6. Shri Girish Kekre, learned Government Advocate at the same time opposed the submissions and submits that pursuant to the reply submitted b
Quasi-judicial officers protected from disciplinary action for errors in judicial functions absent corruption or mala fides; vague, delayed charges quashed.
Errors in judgment by quasi-judicial officers do not constitute misconduct unless there are allegations of extraneous considerations or improper motives.
Prosecution of a public servant requires prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.PC; absence of such sanction voids the proceedings against the petitioner.
Departmental proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, and acquittal in criminal cases does not preclude disciplinary action but requires proper evidence examination.
Point of law :Prevention of corruption - If a public servant, acting as a quasi judicial authority under a statute, passes an order and if such order is in favour of a person other than the Governmen....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
