AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The prayer in this application is to quash Annexure 4, the notification dated 9.1.1991 issued by the Director, Consolidation, Bihar Patna by which he distributed the work to different Joint Directors specifying the territorial jurisdiction and their seats. IT IS said that by a Government notification dated 29.4.1983 (Annexure-7) the State Government had decided that the seat of Joint Director will be attached to that of the Director, Consolidation. It is admitted that the seat of the Director as at Patna. Therefore, by implication it is said that the seat of the Joint Director will also be at Patna although they may have territorial jurisdiction over different areas of the State. By way of illustration Annexure-8 has been filed, to show that Ranjit Kumar Sinha, who was although appointed for Muzaffarpur but his seat was as Patna. It is said that similar is the case with regard to the other Joint Directors. Annexure 4 is a notification issued by the Director on 9.1.1991. As said earlier this notification prescribes the seat and the territorial (Sic) of different Joint Directors.
Mr. Basudeo Prasad appearing in support of the application says that thus (sic) it could not be passed by the (sic) decision taken by the State Government as per Annexure 7.
Mr. Government (sic) has not filed any counter affidavit. (sic) however, drew out attention to Annexure 4 itself. He says that the Director has passed this order u/s 34 Sub-clause (2) delegating his powers u/s 35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act (herein-after referred to as the ''Act'') after obtaining sanction from the Government.
Be that as it may, the sanction referred to in Annexure 4 us only in respect of exercise of powers u/s 35 of the Act, which is necessary u/s 24 Sub-section (2) of the Act. Annexure 4 does make any mention of sanction with regard to the shifting of the seat of Joint Directors. No provision has been shown to us by learned Government Advocate which empowers the Directors to Change the seat of the Joint Director. He can only delegate his powers with the sanction of the State Government for exercise of powers u/s 35 of the Act.
Therefore, (sic) Annexure 4, so far as the (sic) of the seat of different officers are concerned. We are not interfering with the distribution of the work among difference Joint Director on territorial basis as per Annexure 4. The order however, will not stand in the way of the State Government in taking any decision with respect to the change of the seat of the Joint Directors.
The writ application is thus disposed of.
Let a copy of this order be given to Mr. Government Advocate.