The main legal point established in the judgment is that the jurisdiction to relocate public utility land during consolidation proceedings lies with consolidation authorities, and re-litigating an issue that has attained finality amounts to an abuse of the court process.

Manmohan, J. (Oral)

1. Present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 03rd December, 2012 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 8965/2007 whereby the writ petition filed by twenty-one villagers of village Mundka, Delhi, challenging the order of Settlement Officer (Consolidation) dated 04th April, 1983 directing shifting of cremation ground to a new location at the outskirts of extended Lal Dora of the said village was dismissed.

2. The learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition has observed as under:-

“9. Upon indepth consideration of the submissions of respective parties and on perusal of material on record, this Court finds that Settlement Officer's order of 4th April, 1983, which is based upon Financial Commissioner's order of 8th October, 1982 has attained finality and operates as res-judicata. It needs no reiteration that an Authority does not have jurisdiction to decide a matter if res-judicata or principle of estoppel arises. However, in this regard, a decision of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Rajinder Singh and Ors. Vs. Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi and Ors., rendered on 17th August, 2007 can be referred to with advantage.

xxx xxx xxx

11. Attention of this Court was not drawn to any provision of law which permits Financial Commissioner to recall or review its order. Undisputedly, order of 8th October, 1982 passed by the earlier Financial Commissioner, Delhi has attained finality. Therefore, Financial Commissioner, Delhi was justified in not entertaining revision petition against aforesaid order of 8th October, 1982 and Settlement Officer's order of 4th April, 1983, which has attained finality.

12. So far as jurisdictional bar raised by petitioners' counsel is concerned, suffice it would be to say that no doubt, regulation and maintenance of public utility lands is to be done by Gaon Sabha/Gaon Panchayat concerned but its relocation during the consolidation proceedings can be only done by the consolidation authorities. It is so said, because a plain reading of Section 18 of Consolidation Act makes it abundantly so clear. Aforesaid provision reads as under:-

“18. Lands reserved for common purposes – Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, it shall be lawful for the Consolidation Officer to direct–

(a) that any land specifically assigned for any common purpose shall cease to be so assigned and to assign any other land in its place;

(b) that if in any area under consolidation no land is reserved for any common purpose including extension of the village abadi, or if the land so reserved is inadequate, to assign other land for such purpose.”

13. In view of the afore-noted provision of law, Financial Commissioner's order of 8th October, 1982 relocating the cremation ground outside the extended abadi of village is not only sound on facts but in law as well.

14. As is evident from the aforesaid narration, the jurisdiction to relocate public utility land during consolidation proceedings is of consolidation authorities and not of Gaon Sabha/Gaon Panchayat, whose one of the duty and function as enumerated in Section 18 of The Delhi Panchayat Raj Act, 1954, is to regulate and maintain such cremation grounds.

15. Since aforesaid Deputy Commissioner's Affidavit of 22nd March, 1995 in contempt proceedings before Financial Commissioner in another matter and the Gaon Panchayat Resolution of 11th July, 1983, which appears to be defective for want of quorum, are in ignorance of Section 18 of Consolidation Act as noted herein above, therefore, they are to be discarded as it is abundantly clear from afore-going narration that jurisdiction to relocate any public utility land of Gaon Sabha/Gaon Panchayat during consolidation proceeding is of consolidation authorities and not of Gaon Sabha/Gaon Panchayat………………”

(emphasis supplied)

3. Learned counsel for appellants submitted that the learned Single Judge fail