AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Govindan Nair, C.J.—This appeal is purported to have been taken u/s 30(1) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 3963, from an order refusing to grant stay by the Tribunal pending disposal of an appeal before it taken u/s 11(3) of the same Act-We shall extract Sections 11(3) and 30(1) of the Act:
11(3) Against a decision of the Assistant Settlement Officer under Sub-section (2) the Government may, within one year from the date of the decision and any person aggrieved by such decision may, within three months of the said date, appeal to the Tribunal:
Provided that the Tribunal may, in its discretion allow further time not exceeding two months for the filing of any such appeal:
Provided further that the Tribunal may, in its discretion entertain an appeal by the Government at any time if it appears to the Tribunal that the decision to the Tribunal of the Assistant Settlement Officer was vitiated by fraud or by mistake of fact-
30(1) Against any decision of the Tribunal under Sub-section (3) of Section 11, the Government may, within six months from the date of the decision and any person aggrieved by any decision of the Tribunal under Sub-section (3) of Section 11, Section 26, Section 27, Section 28, or Section 29 may, within three months from the date of the decision, appeal to the Special Appellate Tribunal consisting of two Judges of the High Court nominated from time to time by the Chief Justice in this behalf-
Provided that the Special Appellate Tribunal, may in its discretion, allow further time not exceeding three months for the filing of such appeal.
Section 11(3) in so many words does not say that the appeal taken u/s 11(3) should be decided. But it is axiomatic and consequential on the conferment of power on the Tribunal that the Tribunal should dispose of the appeal. A decision on the appeal is, therefore, clearly contemplated by Section 11(3). Any doubt on this matter is set at rest by the opening words of Section 30(1) which provides for an appeal to this Court from the decision of the Tribunal u/s 11(3). u/s 11(3) the Tribunal will be deciding the appeal before it. Any appeal u/s 30(1) can only be from an order of the Tribunal disposing of or deciding the appeal. This appeal is, therefore not maintainable.
Counsel on behalf of the Appellant pointed out that the power of deciding the appeal and the jurisdiction to deal with the appeal should necessarily imply the power to grant stay. This may be so. But that does not affect the question as to the scope of Section 30(1) providing for an appeal to this Court. We have no doubt that the appeal u/s 30(1) to this Court can only be from a decision in the appeal disposing of the appeal, taken u/s 11(3) and not from any interlocutory order passed in appeal. We accordingly dismiss this appeal.