Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
S. R. SINGH
CHANDRIKA RAI - Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION, GHAZIPUR - Respondents
C. M. W. P. 21237 Of 1993
Decided On : 10/07/1994
CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS - CHAK ROAD - SECTION 8A, 9, 9B, 20, 48 - STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES - FINALITY - OBJECTION - JURISDICTION - IMPLIED POWER - DOCTRINE OF PER INCURIAM - BINDING PRECEDENTS - STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION - U. P. CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS ACT, 1953.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the orders of the Settlement Officer and Deputy Director of Consolidation, which allowed the respondent's objection under Section 20 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, and provided a Chak road to facilitate access to his Chak.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Consolidation authorities have jurisdiction to provide Chak roads and water channels at the behest of a tenure holder in proceedings under Section 20 of the Act. This power is impliedly conferred upon them as a power ancillary or incidental to the main power of allotting Chaks and earmarking land for public purposes under Section 9a read with Section 9b of the Act.
Issues: 1. Whether the Consolidation authorities have jurisdiction to provide Chak roads and water channels in proceedings under Section 20 of the Act? 2. Whether the statement of principles prepared under Section 8a of the Act is final and cannot be challenged in proceedings under Section 20? 3. Whether the decisions in Ram Murat v. Mata Saran and Sri Pat v. Haridwar are binding precedents on the court?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the Consolidation authorities have implied power to provide Chak roads and water channels in proceedings under Section 20 of the Act. This power is necessary to carry out the purpose of the Act, which is to allot compact areas to individual tenure holders and to promote the development of agriculture. 2. The court held that the statement of principles prepared under Section 8a of the Act is not final and can be challenged in proceedings under Section 20. The finality of the statement of principles is subject to the condition that there is no provision "otherwise" in the Act. The provisions of Sections 19 (1) (d), 19a, and 20 (3) read with Rules 46 (1a) and 47 (3) of the Rules provide for "otherwise" and therefore allow tenure holders to claim Chak roads not already provided for in the statement of principles. 3. The court held that the decisions in Ram Murat v. Mata Saran and Sri Pat v. Haridwar are not binding precedents on the court. These decisions were rendered without discussing the relevant statutory provisions and are therefore per incuriam.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, upholding the impugned orders of the Settlement Officer and Deputy Director of Consolidation.
S. R. SINGH, J.
( 1 ) PRESENT petition is directed against the judgment and orders dated 12-3-1992 and 20-11-1992 passed by Settlement Officer, Consolidation Ghazipur and Dy. Director of Consolidation Ghazipur respectively, the genesis of which is owed to the proceedings for allotment of Chak under Section 20 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (in short the act ). It would transpire that the respondent No. 4- Rishikesh was not provided with the facility of a Chak road to facilitate his access to his chak and accordingly, on publication of statement of proposal, he filed objection under Section 20 of the Act staking demand to the facility of a Chak road and upon the objection, being rejected by the Consolidation Officer, the respondent No. 4 preferred, an appeal before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation under Section 21 of the Act reiterating his demand which has been summed in the appellate order in the following words :-"appealkarta Ki Mang Hei Ki Gata Sankhiya 466 Jis Per Appealkarta Ka Chak Bana Hei Tetha Ye Gata Uski Abadi Ke Sameep He Vahaan So Gata Sankhiya 600 Tak Jahaan Tak Appealkarta Ka Chak Bana Hai, Nali Ke Saath Saath Chak Road Prastavit Kiya Jave. "
( 2 ) THE Settlement Officer, Consolidation undertook a local inspection and ordered that -"appealkarta Ko Chak Road Gata Sankhiya 466 Se Gata Sankhiya 480 Ke Dakkin Medh Tak Nali Ke Kinare Kinare Chak Road Dekar Gata Sankhiya 646 Me Jane Wali Chak Se Milaya Jata Hai.-"the appeal was accordingly allowed vide order dated 12-3-1992 and necessary modifications were effectuated in terms of the order in related Chaks including Chak No. 109, which belongs to the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved against the appellate order dated 12-3-1992, the petitioner went up in revision under Section 48 of the Act. The Deputy Director of Consolidation found that Chak Road was rightly provided by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation. Seeing no justification to upset the application order he dismissed the revision, vide order dated 20-11-1992 as having no force. Hence the instant petition.
( 3 ) SRI Sankatha Rai, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner assailed the impugned orders on the solitary ground that Chak roads in the Unit having already been provided for, in the statement of principles prepared by the Asstt. Consolidation Officer, in consultation with the Consolidation Committee under Section 8a of the Act and the location of the same having not been demurred to under Section 9 of the Act, the matter attained finality under sub-section (3) of Section 9b and any demand under Section 28 for any other Chak road not already provided for in the statement of principles, being not comprehended by the Act, the Settlement Officer, Consolidation acted illegally and without jurisdiction in making provision for a chak Road while deciding the appeal under Section 21 of the Act preferred by respondent No. 4. Elaborating his submissions, Sri Sankath Rai urged that the Consolidation authorities, while entertaining objection, appeal or revision in respect of allotment of Chaks, have, in fact, no jurisdiction to make provision for a Chak Road not already provided for, in that, the claim if any, for a Chak road is entertainable only in proceeding under Section 9 read with Section 9b of the Act and if no objection is filed under Section 9 (2) against the statement of principles drawn under Section 8a, the same becomes final under Section 9b (3) of the Act; not open to challenge at the stage of disposal of objection, appeal or revision arising out of proceeding for allotment of Chak.
( 4 ) THE submission afore-stated, have been made with vehemence, but to be rejected as untenable in law and devoid of merits. The statement of principles prepared under Section 8a inter alia, contained details of areas, as far as they can be determined at that stage to be earmarked for extension of abadi including areas for abadi site for Harijans and Landless persons in the Unit and for such other publ
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
