TMI Blog1955 (2) TMI 30X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al have arisen are as follows: Joginder Singh v. Director of Rural Rehabilitation and others. 3. Joginder Singh was allotted agricultural land in village hill, district Patiala. The allotment in his favour was finally cancelled by the Assistant Custodian General at Delhi by his order dated 28-10-1953. Inder Singh v. Director of Rural Rehabilitation and others. 4. Similarly the allotment made in favour of Inder Singh appellant was finally cancelled by the Assistant Custodian General, Delhi, on 7-5-1953. In cases Nos. 1 and 2 the Assistant Custodian General, Delhi is one of the respondents the other two respondents being Director of Rural Rehabilitation and the Assistant Commissioner Rehabilitation at Patiala. 5. It may here be mentioned that Inder Singh had filed a writ petition in the Punjab High Court which was dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Dayal Singh v. Director of Rural Rehabilitation and others. 6. The appellant was allotted a house in village Dham on 28-1.1-1950. This allotment was challenged before the Assistant Commissioner, Rehabilitation, at Kapurthala. This officer, however, dismissed the appeal of Sunder Singh and others. The aggrieved party t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contrary the appellants urged that the location of the office of the revisional authority at Delhi did not make any difference as the subordinate authorities who were to carry out and give effect to the order resided within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. It was, therefore, urged that writs etc., as prayed for in the writ-petitions could be issued to the local a authorities. Article 226 of the Constitution of India reads as under: Notwithstanding anything in Art. 32, every High Court shall have power, throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, issue to any person or authority, including In appropriate cases any Government, within those territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warrantee and certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III for any other purpose. 10. It is, therefore, manifest that for purposes of jurisdiction Art. 226 contemplates the following two conditions (1) the power to issue the writs etc., extends only to the territories in relation to which High Court exercises jurisdiction, and (2) the w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he learned judgment, observed: We are unable to agree with the learned Judge below that if a tribunal or authority permanently located and normally carrying on its activities elsewhere exercises jurisdiction within those territorial limits so as to affect the rights of parties therein, such tribunal or authority must be regarded as functioning within the territorial limits of the High Court and being therefore amenable to its jurisdiction under Art. 226. These observations in my view clearly repel the contention of the appellants. Apart from this a later decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court affirmed the view expressed in the case 'Election Commission v. Venkata Rao (A)'. A similar question came up for consideration, in - 'K.S. Rashid and Son v. Income-tax Investigation Commission',: AIR 1954 SC 207 (B) in which it was held that: While Art. 225 of the Constitution preserves to the existing High Courts the powers and jurisdictions which they had previously, Art. 226 confers, on all the High Courts new and very wide powers in the matter of issuing writs which they never possessed before. There are only two limitations placed upon the exercise of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ermining die question of jurisdiction of the High Courts in the matter of issuing writs under Art. 226 of the Constitution. The whole law on this subject has been discussed and elucidated by this Court in its recent pronouncement in: AIR 1953 SC 210 (A), there the observations of the Judicial Committee in Tarlakimedi's case (F), upon which reliance has been placed by the Punjab High Court, have been fully explained. Following the authority of the Supreme Court, the Punjab High Court in a later case reported in - Prof. Ram Kumar Luthra v. Punjab University, Solan',: AIR 1954 P H 253 (G) held that as the Punjab University, Solan, was not within the territories in relation to which Punjab High Court exercised jurisdiction, the Punjab High Court was not competent to proceed with the application. It, therefore, follows that the cases relied upon by the Learned Counsel for the appellants can be if no assistance in the decision of the present appeals as they do not adversely affect the contention raised by the Learned Counsel for the respondents. Following the authority of their Lordships of the Supreme Court I hold that merely because the Assistant Custodian General car ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ian, Rajasthan, stood as it was. Under these circumstances, we are of opinion that it is not the order of the Custodian General in revision which is being challenged before us, but the order of the Custodian, Rajasthan. As we have pointed out, the matter would have been different if the Custodian General had in any manner modified the order of the Custodian, Rajasthan, for, in that case, the order in dispute would have been the order of the Custodian General, and we would not have been in a position to issue a writ to the Custodian General. We are, therefore, of opinion that it is unnecessary to issue a writ to the Custodian General in this case, and that we have the power to issue a writ to the Custodian of Evacuee Property, Rajasthan, and to the Assistant Custodian Evacuee Property, Pali, who are also parties before us. 12. With due deference, I cannot persuade myself to agree with the observation made by the learned Judge. The reasons for me conclusions arrived at by nun appear to be mat where a revision is dismissed, the Custodian General does not confirm the order of the local tribunal but merely declines to internee. It is, therefore, the order of the local tribunal whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the C.T.I., Bandikuli, and it was that order which was being questioned in the petition. The learned Judge observed that it was immaterial that the petitioner's efforts failed to get that order quashed by the General Manager whose office was located at Bombay, It is clear that this authority of the Rajasthan High Court also proceeds on the same line of reasoning as the other, mentioned above. Even in these authorities, it is conceded that this Court has no jurisdiction to issue writs to the Custodian General. It is held, however, that they could be issued to the local tribunal. It so, the order of the Custodian General will stand. In case writ is issued to the local tribunal, it will be faced with two contradictory orders one made by the Custodian General under S. 27 of Act of 1950 and the other by this Court. In my opinion this situation is not contemplated in a discretionary remedy by way of writ petition. 13. The Learned Counsel for the appellants also cited some authorities dealing with the matter under the Civil Procedure Code. On the analogy of these cases counsel argued that it were really the orders of the local tribunal which were disputed before us. It was thus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here is abundant authority holding the opposite view. Almost a similar question which requires determination in this case arose before the Allahabad High Court. The Allahabad case, it appears to me, is a direct authority dealing with the contention raised by the appellants. The case referred to Is reported in - 'Hafiz Mohammad Yusuf v. Custodian General, Evacuee Properties, New Delhi',: AIR 1954 All 433 (M). There it was held: Under S. 27, Administration of Evacuee Property Act, the powers of the Custodian General are very wide and for all practical purposes are indistinguishable from those of an appellate authority under the Act. Upon the general principle that The order of a Court merges in that of an appellate authority, the order of the Assistant Custodian merges in the order of the Additional Custodian and that order in its turn merges in the order passed by the Custodian General.... In the course of the judgment the learned Judge observed: It is, in our opinion, now well settled so far as this Court is concerned that the decree of an appellate Court supersedes the decree of the first Court even in cases where the appellate Court merely affirms the original ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... neral principle that the order of a Court merges in that of an appellate authority, we are of the view that the order of the Assistant Custodian made on 25th September 1951 merged in the order of the Additional Custodian made on the 5th April, 1952, and that that order in its turn merged in the order passed by the Custodian General on the 26th August, 1953. I am in respectful agreement with the conclusions arrived at by the learned Judges of the Allahabad High Court. For the same reasons, I am of the view that orders of the Assistant Custodian General superseded those of the local tribunal and those leally were the orders in dispute before us. It, therefore, follows that this Court has no jurisdiction to issue the writs prayed for. A number of authorities were also cited by the Learned Counsel for the respondents in support of the contention that the decree of the lower court merges into that of the appellate court. This proposition now appears to be well settled and it is unnecessary to burden this judgment with all those authorities specially in view of the fact that it is not denied by the counsel for the appellants. The Learned Counsel for the appellants, However, urged t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
