The Allahabad High Court has raised serious concerns over delays in implementing anti-corruption monitoring mechanisms in Uttar Pradesh and directed that a copy of its judgment be placed before Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath through the Chief Secretary.
The observations came while Justice Vinod Diwakar was hearing a petition filed by businessman Avnesh Kumar Agarwal, who challenged the rejection of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) required for renewal of his passport. While granting relief to the petitioner, the Court expanded the scope of the proceedings to examine the State’s compliance with earlier judicial directions concerning corruption investigations.
Court Calls For Greater Bureaucratic Accountability
In a significant observation, the Court suggested that the State Government should consider adopting a doctrine of “superior responsibility” under which senior officials may be held accountable for corruption, misconduct, suppression of records, or failure to implement government policies within departments under their control.
The Court observed that exceptional administrative failures require exceptional remedies and noted that senior officers cannot escape responsibility when serious irregularities occur under their supervision. According to the Court, accountability should extend not only to direct wrongdoing but also to failures in taking timely action or reporting misconduct to higher authorities.
Delay In High-Powered Committee Raises Concerns
The Court referred to a Division Bench judgment delivered in 2023 in Manish Kumar Singh v. State of U.P., which had directed the State Government to establish a High-Powered Committee headed by the Chief Secretary for monitoring corruption and cheating investigations involving government departments.
Although the committee was directed to be constituted within six months, the Court found that it was eventually formed only in December 2025, nearly two years later.
Justice Diwakar observed that compliance was achieved only after the issue was revived through the present proceedings and described the delay as inordinate. The Court expressed concern over repeated instances of delayed implementation of judicial directions.
Court Questions Administrative Functioning
The judgment contains sharp remarks regarding bureaucratic functioning and the exercise of discretionary powers.
The Court noted that unchecked discretion often leads to corruption, discrimination, and administrative inefficiency. It further observed that reluctance to part with discretionary authority may contribute to red-tapism and delays in governance.
According to the Court, rules and regulations exist to ensure transparency, accountability, and principled exercise of public power, and cannot be undermined through administrative inaction.
While noting that contempt proceedings, personal appearance of senior officials, or imposition of costs were available options, the Court chose not to initiate such measures at this stage.
However, it cautioned that judicial restraint should not be interpreted as judicial indifference.
Passport Renewal Dispute Before The Court
The petitioner approached the High Court after a Bareilly court refused to grant an NOC required for renewal of his passport.
The refusal was linked to two criminal cases registered against him in 2007 involving allegations of corruption, forgery, cheating, and destruction of government records.
The High Court noted that one investigation has remained pending for almost two decades, while in the second case, a charge sheet was filed only in 2024 despite the FIR being registered nearly 18 years earlier.
The Court also noted that proceedings in one of the criminal cases had already been stayed by a coordinate bench.
NOC Granted, Passport Authority Directed To Act
Finding the rejection of the NOC legally unsustainable, the High Court set aside the order passed by the Special Judge and granted the NOC to the petitioner.
The Regional Passport Authority, Bareilly, has been directed to process and renew the passport in accordance with law.
The Court further instructed the Chief Secretary to place the judgment before Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and ensure that the High-Powered Committee completes its work and develops a comprehensive accountability framework for errant officials.
Key Takeaways From The Judgment
- Allahabad High Court expressed concern over delays in implementing anti-corruption monitoring mechanisms.
- Court proposed a doctrine of “superior responsibility” for senior bureaucrats.
- High-Powered Committee directed in 2023 was constituted only in December 2025.
- Court criticised administrative delays and excessive discretionary powers.
- NOC for passport renewal granted to petitioner.
- Order directed to be placed before Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath.
Case Title: Avnesh Kumar Agarwal vs. Union of India & 3 Ors.
Bench: Justice Vinod Diwakar
Order Date: June 3, 2026
