KHIRA SWAIN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Should a person sit to hear an appeal as the appellate authority against the decision of his own ? This is the moot question that arises for consideration in this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The petitioner made an application (registered as Misc. Case No. 1850 of 1995) before the Mutation Officer-cum-Tahsildar, Buguda for mutation of land measuring Ac.0.028 in plot No. 3513 under Khata No. 1609 of Mouza Buguda in her favour which she claims to have purchased by a registered sale deed dated 12.7.1968. The Mutation Officer-cum-Tahasildar by order dated 12.3.1996 rejected the said applciation. Being aggrieved by the order of rejection, she filed Mutation Appeal No. 5 of 1996 under Rule 92 of the Orissa Mutation Manual before the Sub-Collector, Ghumsur, Bhanjanagar who by order dated 19.9.1998 (Annexure-2) dismissed it. This order passed in the appeal is. called in question by the petitioner on the ground that it is hit by the principle of "Nemo debet esse judex in propria sua causa' (no man can be a judge in his own cause).

(3.) It is on record that U. Misra was the Mutation Officer-cum-Tahasildar was by order dated 12.3.1996 rejected the application of the petitioner for mutation of the land. It is an undisputed fact that he himself was the Sub- Collector who as the appellate authority rejected the appeal which was filed against his own order. The petitioner filed a petition on 9.9.1998 (Annexure-1) through her advocate before the Sub-Collector stating therein that as Mutation Officer, he rejected her application for mutation and, as such, the appeal should be referred to the Additional District Magistrate for "its proper adjudication in the interest of natural justice". The Sub-Collector in the impugned order has referred to the aforesaid peition filed on behalf of the petitioner and observed as follows :