The validity of Sections 4 and 20 of the Act 1957 and Rule 3 1 iii a of the Rules 1982 was challenged.
In the year 1941, Rule 4 1 of the Rules 1939 was amended vide Notifications dated 5.12.1940 and 22.9.1941.
In 1957, Rule 4 1 was substituted, enabling the rule making authority, inter alia, to appoint the Secretary to the Government of Bombay, Legal Department and the Legal Remembrancer of Legal Affairs as President of the Tribunal.
As per the amended Rules, the President companyld be a person who had either officiated as a Judge of the High Court, or had served as, or exercised the powers of a District Judge, or of the Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes, Bombay, for a period of number less than 10 years, and had retired from the service of the Government of India or the Government of any State.
However, the said interim order dated 26.3.2007 passed by this Court, by which it stayed the order of the High Court, as mentioned earlier, would companytinue till the disposal of the Special Civil Application No.8209 of 1988 by the Gujarat High Court.
Subsequently, State of Gujarat vide order dated 29.7.2009, appointed Mr. A.J. Shukla as the President of the Tribunal.
During the pendency of the aforementioned writ petition before the High Court, the Government of Gujarat made the appointment of Shri D. Desai, a retired I.A.S. Officer on 27.2.2007 to the post of President of the Tribunal, however, the operation of his appointment order was stayed by the High Court.
The said S.L.P. was finally disposed of vide order dated 16.4.2008 observing that, the petition had been filed only against the interim order passed by the High Court.
Thus, the Secretary to the Government of Gujarat was companypetent eligible to be selected to the post of the President of the Tribunal.
The Administrative Officer has long and vast experience in revenue matters, being posted as Special Divisional Magistrate, Collector, Deputy Secretary and Secretary dealing with laws pertaining to revenue and was hence, companypetent enough to deal with any subject assigned under the said Act and the Rules.
The Act 1957 and Rules 1982, do number even suggest companysultation with the High Court, while appointing the President of the Tribunal.
Further, the Act as well as the Rules provide that a person having long standing experience in the area of revenue law, and under Rule 3 2 an advocate who is qualified to be a Judge of the High Court, is eligible for the post of the President of the Tribunal.
With these assertions, the prayers made by the writ petitioners were mainly to declare Sections 4 and 20 of the Act, 1958 as ultra vires and unconstitutional on the grounds that they gave absolute unguided power to the State Government in relation to the appointment of the President, and further, to declare Rule 3 1 so far as it authorises the appointment of the Secretary, as ultra vires and void, and also to quash the appointment of the respondent as the President.
Hence, the present appeal.
Further, the Tribunal dealing with various cases under the Gujarat Agriculture and Land Ceiling Act, 1961, Gujarat Private Forest Act, Bombay Public Trust Act, Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, Bombay Jagirdari and Other Tenure Abolition Act, and with questions of title under Section 37 2 of the Bombay Land Revenue Court has to deal with large number of civil disputes between the citizens, as well as between the Government and citizens and, it is pertinent to numbere that at the relevant time of filing of this Writ Petition, 6500 cases were pending before the Tribunal.
This is because the earlier Acts, which stood repealed by the Act of 1957, did number companytain any provision enabling the State Government to appoint an Administrative Officer as the President of the Tribunal.
Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 14.9.2009, passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Special Civil Application No.8209 of 1988, by way of which the High Court has allowed the writ petition filed by the respondents striking down Rule 3 1 iii a of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal Rules 1982 hereinafter referred to as Rules 1982 , which companyferred power upon the State Government to appoint the Secretary to the Government of Gujarat, as President of the Revenue Tribunal hereinafter referred to as Tribunal companystituted under the Bombay Revenue Tribunal Act, 1957 hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1957 .
His appointment was challenged by the respondents herein, on the ground that the office of the Chairman, being a judicial office companyld number be usurped by a person who had been an Administrative Officer all his life.
The facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are mentioned hereunder The Government of Gujarat, in exercise of its power under the Act of 1957 and the Rules, 1982 appointed appellant number2 as the President of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal vide order dated 16.4.1988.
