Attar Singh and another vs Meer Singh and others

J.V. Gupta, J.

This is plaintiffs'' second appeal whose suit for the grant of the permanent injunction has been dismissed by both the Courts below.

This appeal came up for hearing earlier also, but was adjourned from time to time to await the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Regular Second Appeal No. 2930 of 1980 (State of Haryana v. Vinod Kumar, 1987 R.R.R. 81). The question before the Full Bench therein was : whether an order of a Collector declaring land as surplus without affording the concerned landowner an opportunity of being heard, as envisaged by rule 6 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Rules, 1956, is a nullity and whether a suit to challenge the validity of such an order is maintainable in view of the clear language of section 25 of the Act excluding the jurisdiction of the civil Court, which has been answered in the affirmative by the Full Bench on October 14, 1985, and also held that it is well established that in the case of alternate or concurrent remedies, it is open to the party to choose any one of them. The existence of the remedy under an Act, if any, therefore, would not bar the remedy under the suit if it otherwise was available to the plaintiffs. The jurisdiction of the civil courts to try the suits against the orders passed by the tribunals of special jurisdiction in violation of the provisions of the statutes or principles of natural justice was upheld even though the jurisdiction of the civil Courts to question the legality or validity of the orders of the tribunals was expressly barred by the statutes.

In these circumstances, the appeal succeeds and is allowed. The judgment and decree of the lower appellate court are set aside and the case is sent back to the District Judge, Rohtak, for deciding the appeal either himself or by any other Court of competent jurisdiction whom he may entrust the same, on merits. Since the suit was filed in the year 1971, i.e., more than 14 years back, it is further directed that the appeal be disposed of within three months after the appearance of the parties on December 20, 1985, before him. No costs.