VAITILINGAM v. SIVAGURU
1948 Present : Soertsz
S.P.J.
VAITILINGAM, Appellant, and SIVAGURU (Village
Cultivation Officer), Respondent.
S. C. 597-M. C. Yavuniya, 20,939).
Irrigation Ordinance-Power to cut
effacing-l across "paddy field-Payment of compensation-Hitless franked under
Ordinance- -Ultra virus- Chapter 312, sections 7 and 11-Rule 21.
The Government Agent purporting to act under rule 21 of the rules framed under
section J 1 of Chapter 312 of t he legislative Mincemeats orderable n channel to
be cut across t he paddy Jailed of t he accused for the purpose of irrigating a
tract of paddy fields. The accused blocked the colonel. He wax charged and
convicted.
Held, that the rule did not empower the Government Agent to deprive a proprietor
of his land without acquisition and compensation. Any rule purporting to do so
would be ultra virus.
APPEAL
from judgment of the Magistrate, Vavuniya. H. W. Jayawardene, for the accused,
appellant. R. A. Kannangara, Crown Counsel, for the Attorney General.
Cur. adv. vult.
March 2, 1948. SOERTSZ S.P.J.-
This is a disturbing case, and, if the view taken by the Magistrate is correct,
it means that persons entrus
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.