Buta Singh (Dead) by Lrs. vs Union of India (UOI)

In Buta Singh (deceased) vs. Union of India, (1994) 5 SCC 560, a two Judge bench of this Court after noticing the decision in Bhag Singh vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh, (1985) 2 Suppl. SCR 949, and the subsequent decision of this Court in Scheduled Castes Co-operative Land Owning Society Limited vs. Union of India, (1991) 1 SCC 174, observed that the decision rendered by another two Judge Bench of this Court in Chand Kaur vs. Union of India, (1994) 4 SCC 663 raised a conflict which was needed to be resolved by a Constitution Bench of this Court. That is how this Bench is required to consider whether there is any conflict at all, and if so. whether it was necessary to resolve the same. Having perused the decisions referred to above, including the decision rendered in the case of Mewa Ram (deceased) vs. State of Haryana, (1986) 3 SCR 660, we are of the opinion that the decision rendered by a two Judge Bench in the case of Chand Kaur, (1994) 4 SCC 663, had failed to notice the decisions rendered subsequent to the decision in the case of Bhag Singh, AIR 1985 SC 1576, in particular the decision in the case of Scheduled Castes Co-operative Land Owning Society, Limited, AIR 1991 SC 730, which explained the earlier two decisions. It is, therefore, obvious that the decision rendered in the case of Chand Kaur is per incuriam, inasmuch as, the attention of the Bench was not invited to a three Judge Bench decision in the case of Scheduled Castes Co-operative Land Owning Society, Ltd. which was holding the field. The decision in Chand Kaur''s case, (supra) thus being per incuriam, does not in fact consciously differ from the decision in the case of Scheduled Castes Co-operative Land Owning Society, Limited. We, therefore, put the matter beyond the pale of doubt by stating that the law as laid down in the decision in Scheduled Castes Co-operative Land Owning Society, Limited, AIR 1991 SC 730, is correct and should hold the field; we approve of it and, therefore, the subsequent decision in the case of Chand Kaur (1994) 4 SCC 663, to the extent it conflicts with the view taken in that case cannot be said to be laying down the correct law. We dispose of the reference to this Bench accordingly and the matters will now go back to the appropriate Bench for disposal in accordance with law laid down in Scheduled Castes Co-operative Land Owning Society, Limited, hereby affirmed and approved by us.