New Delhi, Feb 2 (PTI) A summary order dismissing a land revenue matter without assigning any reason by the Madhya Pradesh High Court has come under the scanner of the Supreme Court which not only set it aside but ordered its re-adjudication by other judge of the Indore bench of the high court.
A bench headed by Justice S K Kaul referred to the special power of the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution and said the approach of the top court “cannot be adopted” by high courts while deciding cases under their powers under Article 227 (power of superintendence of HCs over subordinate courts) and they should give some reasons in their orders as they are challenged. “The approach of Article 136 of the Constitution cannot be adopted while deciding petitions by the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,” said the bench which also comprised justice Hrishikesh Roy. “We are thus constrained to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back for reconsideration so that the order to be passed one way or the other records reasons for the same, albeit even if they are brief.
“In view of what has transpired in the impugned order, it would be in the fitness of things that the matter is placed before another learned Judge. The appeal is allowed,” the order said.
Justice Kaul, writing the order for the bench, said that the notice was issued earlier on the short ground that the impugned order “did not reflect any reasons”.
The bench acknowledged the fact that the high court had passed the order under its Constitutional power under Article 227 against an order of the Board of Revenue, Gwalior.
The High Court had recorded that the parties advanced contentions at length but did not record them, it said while taking note of the submissions made by advocate Sumeer Sodhi, who appeared for one of the parties and assailed the high court order.
“There is no reflection of these so called submissions which are stated to have been advanced at length. It is not necessary, in our view, in the matter like this to record elaborate reasons but since these matters are carried forward to this Court, the reasons, albeit brief, have to be recorded to facilitate this Court to understand what weighed with the learned Judge while dismissing the petition,” the bench said while remanding the matter back to the high court for re-adjudication.
The Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court had passed the order on February 27, 2019 in the matter. One Sunita Agarwal purchased property in 2006, was aggrieved by an order of the Board of Revenue disallowing the mutation of the property in her name and had filed a plea in the High Court which had dismissed it without assigning any reason. PTI SJK RKS RKS RKS