senior bureaucrats accountability: Hold senior bureaucrats accountable for lapses: Allahabad High Court to Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath

Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court has urged Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath to accept that it is time to hold senior bureaucrats and senior administrative managers accountable and even hold them criminally liable for the lapses of their own departments or subordinates.

The court also directed the secretary general to submit the decision to the prime minister for his personal review and consideration of the court’s concerns.

Justice Vinod Diwakar said the state should adopt a doctrine of “supreme liability” in which senior officials in the administrative hierarchy are held accountable.

Read more: Fire in high-rise building in Noida: Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath orders expedited relief and rescue operations

“Senior managers should be held accountable for the conduct and performance of their subordinates as it is their professional as well as managerial responsibility to ensure the effective delivery of public services,” the board said.

Petitioner Avnesh Kumar Agarwal has filed a petition challenging the order passed by a special court in Bareilly rejecting his request for No Objection Certificate (NOC) required for renewal of his passport.
The petitioner claimed that the NOC was withheld due to two criminal cases filed against him, one of which involved the Prevention of Corruption Act. In one case, the investigation was pending for almost two decades, and in the other, the criminal complaint was filed only in 2024, after a delay of 18 years. In its judgment dated June 3, the court referred to the Supreme Court’s 2023 order in the case of Manish Kumar Singh v. State of UP, which directed the state government to constitute a High Powered Committee to formulate guidelines to monitor the investigation of FIRs registered by government departments in cases of corruption and cheating.

In this case, the chamber panel, among other instructions, ordered the rapid completion of investigations in a phased manner.

The court learned that after the 2023 order, the committee was established only in December 2025, and this was recorded by the court during the current proceedings.

The court then said that a significant obstacle to the effective implementation of the directions given by the court lay in the mentality of certain sections of the bureaucracy, whose approach was “non-inclusive” and tended to view the preservation of discretion as “an end in itself”.

The court stated that this “fear of losing discretion” primarily led to “red tape” in public administration.

The board, which reserved its decision three months ago while awaiting updates on the committee’s progress, was unable to receive any information at the time of the announcement.

Terming the situation “unfortunate”, the bench reminded the additional attorney general that the chief secretary is the cornerstone of the state’s administration, which requires extraordinary attention from those who represent him.

The court said: “The learned Additional Solicitor General must appreciate that the principal secretary, who acts as the secretary to the Cabinet and the Council of Ministers and in that capacity as the chief advisor to the prime minister and the Council of Ministers on all matters relating to civil administration, policy implementation and inter-ministerial coordination, occupies a special and privileged position and is in every sense the cornerstone of the administration of the State.

“It is therefore imperative that trained legal officers act with exceptional care, prudence and a high sense of corporate responsibility in the discharge of their duties,” the court said.

Consequently, the bench directed the registrar (compliance) to immediately send a copy of the decision to the Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh, directing the committee proceedings to be concluded in a timely and effective manner.

Read more: Allahabad HC asks that expressions ‘court below’ and ‘subordinate court’ not be used in official records

The court admitted the petition, directing the Regional Passport Authority, Bareilly to issue or renew the passport to the petitioner in accordance with the prescribed procedure.