CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has set aside two earlier orders of a single judge that had allowed 50 sub-inspectors of police to submit their annual property declarations beyond the government-extended deadline, ruling that courts cannot assume executive powers to grant further relaxation under service rules.
A division bench comprising Justices Krishna Shripad Dixit and Chittaranjan Dash delivered the judgment while allowing 50 intra-court appeals filed by the state and its functionaries. The appeals challenged two orders dated September 20 and 26, 2025, by which a single judge had permitted the police officials to file their declarations after missing the prescribed timeline.
The bench held that Rule 21(4) of the Orissa Government Servants’ Conduct Rules, 1959 mandates every civil servant to declare assets and liabilities on or before January 31 each year or within such extended period as granted under Rule 31. Non-compliance, it noted, entails serious consequences, including denial of promotion and disciplinary action.
The state had extended the deadline twice for the year 2024, first up to February 28, 2025, with the chief minister’s approval and subsequently up to May 31, 2025. The bench recorded that the respondent employees did not file their declarations even during these extended periods. Their plea that they were engaged in fieldwork was termed “nothing but a ruse”.
The court observed that after the 2021 amendment, filing of asset declarations became a prerequisite for promotion and postponement of DPC meetings could not extend the statutory deadline.
Rejecting the plea of legitimate expectation based on earlier extensions, the bench termed it “ridiculous”, adding that sporadic extensions do not create enforceable expectations.
Highlighting the objective of ensuring probity and transparency in public service, the court said that multiple relaxations would defeat the very purpose of the Rules. Concluding that the cause of public administration will be more served by sustaining the stand of government, the bench allowed the appeals and set aside the impugned order of the single judge.