Validity of Rule autorising disposal of appeal by two members.

This is an application for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the proceedings and the decision of the Estates Abolition Tribunal at Madurai, dated 22nd May, 1950, in Revenue Appeal No. 54 of 1950. The only ground on which the writ is sought is that only two members of the Tribunal heard and disposed of the appeal filed by the petitioner under section 9(4) of Madras Act XXVI of 1948, when the Tribunal as constituted by the Government consisted of three members. The petitioner is a mortgagee of a village in Ramnad Taluk. The settlement officer, Ramnad, acting under section 9 of the Madras Act XXVI of 1948 held an enquiry and declared the village not to be an inam estate as defined in section 2(7) of the said Act. Against his decision there was an appeal to the Estate Abolition Tribunal at Madurai by a ryot of the village. Two members of the Tribunal sat and heard the appeal and by their judgment dated 22nd May, 1950, reversed the decision of the settlement officer and declared the village to be an inam estate.

The following are the provisions of Madras Act XXVI of 1946 material for disposal of the contention raised in this case. Section 2(14) defines Tribunal as "a Tribunal constituted under section 8 and having jurisdiction." Section 8 provides for the constitution of Tribunals for certain of the purposes of the Act, and runs thus:

"(1) The Government shall constitute as many Tribunals as may be necessary for the purposes of this Act.

(2) Each Tribunal shall consist of three members: one of them (who shall be its chairman) shall be a District Judge or an officer eligible to be appointed as a District Judge, another shall be a Subordinate Judge or an officer eligible to be appointed as a Subordinate Judge, and the third shall be a Revenue Divisional Officer or an officer eligible to be appointed as a Revenue Divisional Officer.

(3) Each Tribunal shall have such jurisdiction, and over such estates or parts thereof, as the Government may, by notification from time to time, determine.

(4) Every Tribunal shall have all the powers of a civil Court to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents."

Under section 9(4)(a) any person deeming himself aggrieved by a decision of the settlement officer under sub-section (3) may appeal to the Tribunal. Where any such appeal is preferred, the Tribunal, after notice to the interested parties, and giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard, shall give its decision [section 9(4)(b)]. Besides the jurisdiction to decide appeals from the decision of the settlement officer under section 9, the Tribunal is also entrusted with several important duties and for carrying them out large powers have been conferred on the Tribunals. Section 67 empowers the Government to make rules to carry out the purposes of the Act, and in particular such rules may provide for inter alia.

"(b) the procedure to be followed by the Tribunals, special Tribunal, authorities and officers appointed, or having jurisdiction, under this Act."

Purporting to act in exercise of this power the following rules have been made and published by the Government in the following Notification:

"In exercise of the powers conferred by section 67(1) and (2)(b) of the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (Madras Act XXVI of 1948), His Excellency the Governor of Madras hereby makes the following rules in regard to the procedure to be followed by the Tribunals constituted under section 8 of that Act:- RULES.

1. Not less than two members shall be necessary to constitute a sitting of a Tribunal.

2. All questions arising for the decision of a Tribunal, in any matter before it, shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the members. If any matter has been heard by only two of the members and the members are divided in opinion as to the decision to be given, the matter shall be referred to the third member and decided according to the opinion which along with his constitute