High Court imposes Rs. 25,000 cost on State for delayed filing and directs completion of land transfer investigation within six weeks; Principal Secretary Revenue summoned to ensure compliance
The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) has issued stern directions to the State of Uttar Pradesh regarding allegations of unauthorized transfer of 59 acres of land out of 117 acres granted to M/s Modi Rubber Ltd. under the Grants Act. The court, hearing Public Interest Litigation No. 529 of 2022, has set a tight timeline for completing the investigation and has imposed monetary penalties for administrative negligence.
Background of the Case:
The PIL was filed by Lokesh Kumar Khurana, raising serious concerns about the alleged unauthorized transfer of a significant portion of land that was originally granted to Modi Rubber Ltd. The matter has been pending for considerable time, with preliminary inquiries at the district level indicating that the allegations appeared to be correct. However, the investigation was escalated to the State level and entrusted to officials of the Board of Revenue on February 24, 2024.
Key Findings and Judicial Directions:
During the hearing on September 2, 2026, the court found two major areas of concern: the government's failure to file a supplementary counter affidavit as previously ordered on October 8, 2025, and the Inquiry Committee's inexplicable delay in submitting its investigation report.
Ms. Aparna U., Principal Secretary, Revenue, Government of U.P., who appeared in person, expressed apologies for the administrative lapses. She explained that while the Inquiry Report was received on June 3, 2025, it was inconclusive. Subsequently, committee members were directed to submit another report on December 3, 2025, but despite reminders, no report has been submitted.
Court's Decisive Orders:
Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla have directed the four-member Inquiry Committee—comprising the Special Executive Officer of Board of Revenue, the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue) Meerut, the Chief Treasury Officer Meerut, and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate—to complete their investigation and submit the report to the State Government within six weeks from the date of judgment.
The State Government has been given three weeks after receiving the report to take a final, considered decision on the matter. The case will be reconsidered in court on November 18, 2026.
Consequences for Non-Compliance:
The court has made it abundantly clear that failure to comply with these timelines will result in the Committee members appearing before the court in person, and the Principal Secretary, Revenue will be required to join proceedings through video conferencing. This shows the court's determination to ensure accountability at the highest administrative levels.
Penalties Imposed:
Recognizing the government's administrative negligence and delay, the court imposed a cost of ?25,000 on the State, to be paid directly to the petitioner, Lokesh Kumar Khurana, who is pursuing this matter in public interest. The court has also permitted the State Government to recover this amount from officials or personnel responsible for the non-compliance, thereby placing responsibility on individual officials.
Monitoring Mechanism:
The Principal Secretary, Revenue has been specifically directed to monitor compliance of court orders to ensure timely action and prevent recurrence of such delays in future. This direction represents the court's broader intent to reform administrative practices and establish accountability.
Significance of the Judgment:
This judgment is significant for several reasons. First, it demonstrates the court's commitment to protecting public interest in matters involving potential land misappropriation. Second, it establishes that administrative delays in public interest litigation will attract financial penalties and personal accountability for officials. Third, it emphasizes that irrespective of officers' changes or administrative transitions, the government's institutional responsibility to comply with court orders remains paramount.
The case highlights a critical issue of governance—the unauthorized transfer of government-granted land could have significant implications for public resources and industrial development. The court's intervention ensures that such matters receive timely and thorough investigation rather than being indefinitely delayed through bureaucratic inaction.
Procedural Compliance:
The government has been directed to file a supplementary counter affidavit within 10 days, and if the inquiry report is received within the stipulated timeline, another counter affidavit shall be filed thereafter. This ensures that all necessary information reaches the court for its final determination.
Bottom Line:
Public Interest Litigation - Allegations of unauthorized transfer of land granted under the Grants Act - Directions issued to Inquiry Committee for timely submission of report and imposition of costs for delay in filing supplementary counter affidavit.
Statutory Provision(s):
Public Interest Litigation
Lokesh Kumar Khurana v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc Id 2972602
