Judgment

K. N. SAIKIA, J.:- This appeal by special leave is from the Judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dated 21-9-1979 in Civil Writ Petition No. 2247 of 1979 allowing the petition and setting aside the order of the Director, Consolidation of Holdings dated 8-2-1979.

2. The appellant Gram Panchayat, hereinafter referred to at the Panchayat, was the onwer of 1200 Bighas of land in village Kanonda, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Rohtak. A Scheme of Consolidation of Holdings, hereinafter referred to as the Scheme, of the village was confirmed on 15-1-1974 under Section 20 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (50 of 1948), hereinafter referred to as the Act. The. Panchayat, therefore, moved an application under Section 42 of the Act on 20-9-1977 for setting aside the Scheme, objecting to the utilisation of the land of value of -/ 2/ - (two annas) and allotments made to the other right holders for their benefit. On 24-1-1979 a Mushtehri Mundadi was made for information of all the villagers concerned, but the right-holders were absent and ex parte proceedings were taken against them. The Panchayats case was that under the said Scheme the Panchayat land was consolidated, repartitioned and allotted to persons who did not have any right to hold the land. Besides, the land of Dharat containing two wells and a big house being religious place of worship was also partitioned under the Scheme and consequently the Panchayat has been reduced to a landless person, financially weakened and rendered incapable of rendering service in the village.

3. After hearing the parties the Director in his order dated 8-2-1979 observed that it was evident from the perusal of the record that the Scheme of Consolidation of the village was confirmed on 15-1-1974 whereas the application had been filed on 20-9-1977 and as such the application had been filed too late. After the expiry of six months period the application was time barred. However, he said in his order:

"In this case only to benefit some land owners,. the land of the value of two annas has been allotted due to which the deserving persons have been left over and they have not been given even Abadi plots. Apart from this the Panchayat had no other land to cultivate, due to which the Panchayat is unable to develop the agricultural schemes and in these circumstances of the matter I condone the delay in filing the present application."

4. He accordingly set aside the Scheme and remanded the case to the Consolidation Officer under Section 21(2) of the Act with some directions. Against that order the respondents moved the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Civil Writ Petition No. 2247 of 1979 urging inter alia, that the Director of Consolidation of Holdings had condoned the delay without there being any ground for the same and that, in doing so, he had acted illegally and with material irregularity. The High Court held that from the observations of the Director it was evident that the delay was condoned on extraneous consideration as no reason whatsoever was given by the applicant in the application filed before him under Section 42 of the Act as to why it was filed after the period of limitation. In that view of the matter, holding that the Director of Consolidation of Holdings had acted illegally and with material irregularity in condoning the delay, the High Court by the impugned order dated 21-9-1979 allowed the writ. petition and quashed the order of the Director of Consolidation of Holdings dated 8-2-1979.

5. Mr. A.B. Rohtagi, the learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the High Court erred in setting aside the Director of Consolidations order applying to the confirmation of the Scheme the period of limitation of six months as prescribed in Rule 18 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Rules 1949, hereinafter referred to as the Rules, inasmuch as that rule speaks only of orders and no