RAGHUNANDAN PANDA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal filed on grant of special leave by this court, the appellant challenges the decision of the Orissa High Court dismissing a writ application of the appellant. He had prayed for the quashing of the order of the Revenue Authorities leasing out in favour of respondent No. 3 a Nazul plot in the town of Sambalpur in the State of Orissa and to set aside the registered lease dated 3-l2-1970 executed persuant to the order aforesaid. It was asserted by the appellant that the lease in favour of the 3rd respondent was not in accordance with the Orissa State Urban Land Settlement Rules of 1959 - hereinafter called the Rules. The Bench of the High Court disposing of the writ petition has taken the view following an earlier Bench decision of the same court that the rules are administrative and a writ does not lie for non-compliance with any of them. In the opinion of the High Court, therefore, it was not necessary to examine the respective stands of the parties to challenge the grant of the lease to respondent No. 3 and its non-grant to the appellant.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the view of the High Court is erroneous in law. Even administrative rules were meant to be observed and followed. Grant of lease to respondent No. 3 being contrary to the requirement of the rules, counsel submitted the order of the Revenue Authorities and the consequent execution of the registered lease was arbitrary, void and illegal.

(3.) It has been pointed out by a division Bench of this court to which one of us was a party in the case of Union of India v. K. P. Joseph, (1973) 2 SCR 752 that