TMI Blog1960 (8) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision of this Court in Munsha Singh v. State of Punjab 2. The judgment of the Full Bench contains a resume of the statutes and rules dealing with the question of consolidation of holdings, and I shall presently refer to the more relevant features of this legislation. The facts of the present case are that a scheme for the consolidation of holdings in village Bhoot in district Jullundur was prepared. Out of the consolidated pool of proprietary land 20 acres of laud was allotted to the Gram Panchayat for the common purposes of the village. No compensation was, however, paid to the proprietors for this land, and it is alleged that the deprivation of the use and management of these 20 acres is an infringement of the fundamental right of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... badi deh which was under the house owned by a non-proprietor would vest in that non-proprietor. Rules were framed under Act 50 of 1948. In 1957 the following sub-rule was added to rule 16 as originally framed: 16 (ii). In an estate or estates where during consolidation proceedings there is no shamlat deh land or such land is considered inadequate, land shall be reserved for the village Panchayat and for other common purposes, under Section 18(c) of the Act. out of the common pool of the village at a scale prescribed by Government from time to time. Proprietary rights in respect of land so reserved (except the area reserved for the extension of abadi of proprietors and non-proprietors) shall vest in the proprietary body of the estate or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owed the petition on the first ground and held that the rule was beyond the scope of the Act inasmuch as Act 50 of 1948 was intended merely to provide for the compulsory consolidation of agricultural holdings and for preventing the fragmentation of agricultural holdings ; it was not intended to provide authority for adding to the shamlat land or depriving the proprietors of any land owned by them. The matter was not considered from the second aspect and no decision of the vires of the Act was given. The Punjab Legislature, thereafter promulgated Act 27 of 1960 which is now being impugned. Section 2 of the amending Act is in the following terms: ''2. In the long title of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ular case where the jagirdars were mere inter-mediaries between the Government and the actual occupiers of land. There is nothing in the judgment of the Supreme Court to indicate that Article 31A was confined only to the cases of jagirdars, for intermediaries. Intermediaries , no doubt, fall within its scope, but the Article has much wider application, and, indeed, Venkatarama Ayyar J., who delivered the judgment in that case, pointed out that the restricted meaning of the word jagir in Article 31A could not be given effect to. Mr. Gujral argued that this was clearly a case of deprivation, because although according to Rule 16(ii) the names of the proprietors continued to be shown in the proprietary column of the revenue records, the pos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which is under the control of Government and not a commercial corporation, comes within the definition of local authority . A reference to the General Clauses Act, Clause 31 of Section 3 provides the definition for ''local authority . Local authority is defined to mean. a municipal Committee, district board, body of Port Commissioners or other authority legally entitled to, or entrusted by the Government with, the control or management of a municipal or local fund. The Gram Panchayat Act makes provision for local funds which are managed by the village Panchayats, and a Panchayat , therefore, clearly falls within the meaning of local authority given in Clause 31 of Section 3 of the General Clauses Act. That being so, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|