Summary
The Supreme Court upheld dismissal of two civil suits challenging a prescribed authority’s land-ceiling order. Section 26 of the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act expressly excluded civil-court adjudication of matters assigned to the statutory authorities. As the plaints sought a declaration invalidating the ceiling order, the proper remedy was the Act’s appeal or revision procedure rather than a civil suit.
Issues
- Whether civil suits challenging the prescribed authority’s ceiling order were barred.
Provisions considered
- Section 26, Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972The express jurisdictional bar applied to the suits seeking to invalidate the prescribed authority’s order. (¶ 17–21)
Held
- The nature of relief disclosed by both plaints was a challenge to the legality of the prescribed authority’s ceiling order, a matter within the statutory exclusion of civil jurisdiction. (¶¶ 17–18, 20–21)
- General civil jurisdiction yields to an express statutory bar. The plaintiffs’ remedy was appeal or revision under Section 18 of the ceiling legislation. (¶ 19–20)
Result
Appeals dismissed; High Court’s conclusion that both civil suits were barred upheld.