The Allahabad High Court has canceled the suspension of Suresh Chandra Maurya, Sub-Registrar of Ghaziabad Sadar and directed to complete the ongoing departmental disciplinary proceedings against him in four months as per the rules, giving an opportunity of hearing.
A Single Bench of Justice Saurabh Srivastava passed this order while hearing a petition filed by Suresh Chandra Maurya.
It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner was working as Sub-Registrar, Sadar (V), at District –Ghaziabad, some sort of inspection was conducted at a large scale in the State of U.P regarding the registration of the power of Attorneys, wherein District Ghaziabad was also subject to inquiry and some irregularities regarding the registration of power of Attorney were reported.
While conducting the inquiry, it has been observed specifically in District Ghaziabad that many of the power of Attorneys which was in fact registered and executed did not pertain to the State of U.P and the same pertains to the property which were in the other State i.e Haryana etc, it was also alleged that so far as the petitioner is concerned when he was rendering his services at District Ghaziabad specifically between the month of January 2022 to November 2022 he also registered many power of Attorneys in favour of the concerned person in some of the power of Attorneys which were registered by the petitioner were pertaining to the plots and the properties which were not in the State of UP.
It has been alleged that act of the petitioner was in violation of Section 2(21) of the Indian Stamp Act and the same was also violative of Section 28 of the Indian Registration Act of 1908, in pursuance to the same charge-sheet was also issued to the petitioner on 03.02.2023.
After affording proper opportunity to defend the petitioner 15 days’ time was granted to submit his reply over the charges as levelled against him, meanwhile vide order dated 15.02.2023, the petitioner was put under suspension.
While challenging the order dated 15.02.2023, Senior Counsel for the petitioner raised his arguments on the ground that power of Attorneys is only a creation of urgency where the grantor authorises the grantee to do the acts specified therein on behalf of the grantor, when executed will be binding on the grantor as if the same is done by him, so far as the Sub-Registrar is concerned who is in fact the registering officer of the power of Attorney, the concerned officer cannot inquire into title as his power is not quasi judicial but administrative in nature, the registering officer is only expected to re-assure himself that the document to be registered is accompanied by supporting documents, moreover he is not expected to evaluate the title or a irregularity in the documents as such the examination to be done by him is incidental to ascertain that there is no violation of provisions of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 and as such the scope of the Sub-Registrar in cases of registering the power of Attorney is very limited, he is not required under the law to go into the merits of the applications or the documents preferred by the various person for any such thing including the registration of power of Attorney.
Per contra, Standing Counsel vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the petition and supported the order dated 15.02.2023 passed by the Inspector General Registration, U.P Lucknow on the basis of the allegation as put forward through the charge-sheet against the petitioner.
“Prima facie, the case is made out by the counsel for the petitioner for seeking indulgence of the Court. The arguments extended by the Senior counsel for the petitioner seems to be forceful.
The registering authority cannot be held responsible for increasing the number of documents registered at the place where the Sub-Registrar rendering his services, if the same is more than the expected one the registering authority cannot be held responsible for the same”, the Court observed while allowing the petition.
“In view of the the aforementioned facts and circumstances, order dated 15.02.2023 passed by Inspector General Registration is hereby quashed and set aside, however it is made clear that the disciplinary proceedings as initiated against the petitioner will be continued and the same may be finalized after affording the opportunity to the petitioner by way of complying the mandatory provisions as provided in the statutory laws pertaining to the services of the petitioner.
The disciplinary proceedings be finalized as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of the certified copy of this order be produced before the competent authority. However, it is also made clear that the petitioner shall extend his full cooperation to the Disciplinary Authority for finalizing the disciplinary proceeding which is pending against the petitioner”, the Court ordered.