PESHAWAR: Peshawar High Court has declared as illegal and set aside appointment of 13 naib tehsildars as sub-registrars by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Inspector General of Registration (IGR) in different areas of the province under registration of documents law.

A bench consisting of Justice Sahibzada Asadullah and Justice Wiqar Ahmad Khan accepted a petition jointly filed by around 15 employees of the establishment of IGR working under Registration Act, 1908, and ruled that the IGR was not vested with the requisite authorisation of those appointments.

The petitioners had contended that under the prevailing departmental rules, only sub-registrars duly promoted within the service cadre might be assigned the functions and notified as sub-registrars under the Registration Act. They contended that the appointment of naib-tehsildars as sub-registrars in the present matter was illegal.

Lead counsel for the petitioners, Advocate Danyal Khan Chamkani, referred to the rules of the department and contended that after the amendments made to rules through a notification on Jan 23, 2020, the earlier existing clause providing a window for appointment of naib tehsildars, on temporary basis, had also been closed.

IGR not authorised under law to issue such orders, court rules

He stated that the new rules provided that sub-registrars could only be posted by promotion on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness from amongst the head registration moharrars with at least five-year service as such or having 10 years accumulative service as head registration moharrar and registration moharrar.

The counsel representing the respondents and additional advocate general for the provincial government argued that sections 6 and 12 of Registration Act authorised the department to post any person or any public servant as sub-registrar, therefore, the appointment of the said 13 respondents had wrongly been challenged.

They said that section 6 of the Act provided that provincial government might appoint such persons, whether public officers or not, as it thought proper, to be registrars and sub-registrars of districts and sub-districts, respectively.

The bench discussed in detail different provisions of the Registration Act and relevant rules, observing that as per prevalent rules a sub-registrar could only be appointed by promotion on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness, amongst the head registration moharrar with at least five-year service as such or having 10 years accumulative service as head moharrar and registration moharrars.

“The existing rules are not allowing for appointment of naib tehsildars, and that also in such large scale as had been done in the case in hand,” the bench ruled in its 19-page detailed judgement.

It pointed out when the bench asked for submission of a report whether approval of the provincial cabinet was obtained for appointment of the 13 respondents, relevant authorities of provincial government submitted a report.

The bench observed while passing the impugned orders for appointment of naib tehsildars as sub-registrars the competent authority expressly mentioned that the said appointments were being made under section 6 of the Act.

The bench observed that the same provision was vesting authority in the provincial government, but it was not giving any powers to IGR for making those appointments.

The bench pointed out that IGR tried to take refugee behind section 12 of the Act, which provided when any sub-registrar was absent, or when his office was temporarily vacant, any person whom the registrar of the district appointed in that behalf should be sub-registrar during such absence, or until the vacancy was filled up.

“Section 12 was only providing powers to registrar of district to make temporary appointments in case sub-registrar goes on leave or remains absent or when the post is vacant temporary. Here also the powers have not been given by legislature to inspector general of registration particularly for mass scale appointments of naib tehsildar across the province as sub-registrars,” the bench ruled.

The bench said that basic controlling authority had been vested in provincial government and IGR could not have resorted to exercise powers of government in any manner unless expressly authorised under the Registration Act or other laws.

Published in Dawn, October 5th, 2025