Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Contentions in the wit petitions before the learned Single Judge:

16. The respondents-writ petitioners filed W.P.Nos. 17020 of 1994 and 1461 of 1995, out of which these writ appeals arise, challenging the said order dated 22-6-1994 passed by the Joint Collector in purported exercise of the power conferred under Section 9 of the ROR Act. It was mainly contended that under Section 9 of the ROR Act, the Joint Collector can call and examine only the order passed or proceedings taken by any recording authority or an appellate authority to satisfy himself as to the regularity of such record, order or proceeding or the correctness, legality or propriety of any decision passed or order made therein and may pass orders amending, modifying, annulling or reversing such order or proceeding if it appears to him that it is just and necessary to do so. The Joint Collector cannot revise or review any earlier order passed by the same authority in exercise of the very power under Section 9 of the ROR Act. It was also contended that the suo motu revision cannot be exercised after an inordinate delay of more than twelve years and if at all can be exercised within a reasonable time. It was further contended that the Joint Collector cannot go beyond the decree granted by a competent Court of Civil jurisdiction as held by this Court in Meer Ahmed Ali Khan v. Momen Begum (1970 (2) APLJ 43). It was also urged that since there was already a direction of the High Court to implement the Civil Court decree to which he was a party, the impugned order amounts to refusal to obey the order of the High Court.

25. According to the definition contained in Section 2(9) of the ROR Act, "record of rights" means records prepared and maintained under the provisions, or for the purposes of this Act.

26. Section 3 of the ROR Act deals with preparation and updating of record of rights in all lands. That after commencement of the Act in any area, there shall be, prepared and brought up-to-date from time to time by the recording authority in such manner, and thereafter maintained in such form as may be prescribed, a record of rights in all lands in every village in that area and such record of rights shall contain the following particulars, namely:

39. The recording authority and the appellate authority or any other officer for the purpose of holding any enquiry under the Act are clothed with the same powers as are vested in the Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 when trying a suit in respect of summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath: requiring the discovery and production of documents, etc. The statutory functions, thus, entrusted to the authorities under the Act are of judicial character. The authorities are required to hold enquiry and sitting and make decisions in relation to the proceedings brought before them for which purpose they are empowered to summon the witnesses and administer the oaths. The performance of functions entrusted to the authorities under the Act terminates any order that has the conclusive effect. The said orders are binding and conclusive inasmuch as they have the force of law without the need for confirmation or adoption by any other authority. Those orders cannot be impeached indirectly in collateral proceedings. The authorities under the Act are duty bound to act judicially in conformity with the natural justice. There cannot be any doubt whatsoever that the functions performed by the authorities under the provisions of the ROR Act are quasi-judicial in nature. The conferment of procedural as well as substantive rights upon the individuals is relation to modification and updating of record of rights in accordance with the provisions of the ROR Act empowering the authorities to alter the preexisting rights undoubtedly suggests the nature of functions discharged by them as quasi-judicial nature.

79. In our considered opinion, the above principle will apply not only to the Courts of law but also to the statutory authorities, which, like the recording authority, appellate authority or revisional authority under the ROR Act, are conferred with the power to record evidence by applying certain provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure including the power to enforce the attendance of witnesses and to receive evidence and affidavits. The recording authority and other authorities under the provisions of ROR Act are conferred with power to decide the disputes by following the prescribed procedure and invoking the power under Section 10 of the ROR Act read with the relevant rules framed thereunder. The Recording Authority, appellate authority as well as the revisional authority have jurisdiction not only to examine a witness on oath, but also to require the discovery and production of documents, etc., in order to decide the issues that arise for consideration before them.