The authority granted to the Manager under Sec.17, Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act is a limited authority which is subject to the rules made under Sec.19 of the Act. Any settlement made by the Manager in derogation of Rule 16 would be void and without jurisdiction.

1. In these two appeals, a common question of law arises, namely, whether the settlements made with the plaintiff-appellant by the Manager appointed under the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act are invalid on the ground that the Commissioner has not accorded his sanction to the same.

2. The plaintiff brought the suits alleging that, on 14-1-1943, the Manager appointed under the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act made a permanent settlement of 25.24 acres of land in village Ursaugi of Palamau District after taking salami. The land belonged to one Kedar Nath Singh, defendant 1 in Title Suit No. 115 of 1944, In the other title suit, namely, Title Suit No. 116 of 1944, the plaintiff alleged that he took Settlement of 11.36 acres of land from the Manager appointed under the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act, The land belonged to defendants 1 to 8 of this title suit. It is the case of the plaintiff that parwana was issued, and possession was delivered to him by the Manager of the encumbered estate.

3. The defendant-proprietors contested the respective suits mainly on the ground that the Manager appointed under the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act had no authority to make permanent settlement of the lands in favour of the plaintiff. It -was said that the Commissioner did not accord his sanction before settlements were made, and there was a violation of Rule 16 of the rules made under the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act.

4. The learned Munsif accepted the case of the defendants, and held that the settlements were null and void. He further found that the settlements were not bona fide, and that Babu Lakshman Tripathi, who was pleader of the encumbered estate, had taken advantage of his position, and induced the Manager to make settlements in favour of the plaintiff to whom the pleader was closely related.

5. The plaintiff took appeals to the Subordinate Judge of Daltonganj; but the appeals were dismissed, and the findings of the learned Munsif were affirmed.

6. On behalf of the appellant, Mr. Harinandan Singh submitted, in the first place, that the provisions of Rule 16 were beyond the powers conferred on the Government by Sec.19, Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act. Rule 16 states that

"the power to lease under Sec.17 of the Act shall be subject to the following provision --no lease shall be given for any term exceeding three years without the sanction of the Deputy Commissioner or exceeding four years without the sanction of the Commissioner."

This rule must be read in the context of Sec.17 of the Act. Sec.17 states that:

"Subject to the rules made under Sec.19, the Manager shall have power to demise all or any part of the property under his management for any term of years or in perpetuity to take effect in possession, in consideration of any fine or fines, or without fine, and reserving such rents and under such conditions as may be agreed upon."

The language of Sec.17 indicates that the power to lease granted to the Manager is not an absolute power but it is a power subject to the limitation imposed by the rules made under Sec.19 of the Act. It is necessary, therefore) to look at Sec.19 in order to find out what is the limitation upon the power of lease granted to the Manager under Sec.17 of the Act. Sec.19 grants rule-making power to the Provincial Government for regulating the matters enumerated in that Section. Sec.19 states : "The Provincial Government may, from time to time, make rules consistent with this Act to regulate the following matters: (a) the security to be required from subordinate officers under this Act;

(aa) the classes of cases which may be submitted by the Commissioner for the consent of the Provincial Government under Sec.2;

(b) the notices to be given under this Act and the publication of such notices;

(c) the procedure to be followed in deter- mining, under Section 8, the debts and liabilities due to creditors and other persons, and in performing the other duties imposed on any officer by