45 48 49 64 65 69 71 82 and 85 of 1956.
26 31 32 and 33 of 1956 and the judgment and order dated june 12 1956 of the said high court in civil rules number.
this was promptly challenged as a flagrant violation of the provisions of s. 296 1 of the government of india act 1935 and was ultimately declared to be invalid by the assam high companyrt.
parties dissatisfied with the order made by the appellate authority filed petitions under art.
civil rules number.
346 and 359 and for respondent number 1 in appeal number 347.
all the appeals were accordingly heard together.
january 31.
thereafter fresh numberifications were issued on september 15 1952 and may 11 1955 each superseding the immediately previous numberification.
346 347 348 349 and 359 are directed against the judgment of the said high companyrt passed on may 23 1956 in civil rules number.
the excise companymissioner in some cases upheld the orders of the deputy companymissioner and in some cases reversed his orders and directed licence to issue to some other claimants.
b. das b. chaudhuri s. n. andley remeshwar nath j. dadachanji p. l. vohra and s. c. das for respondent number 1 in appeals number.
362 and 363 k. daphtary solicitor general of india b. chaudhuri s. andley rameshwar nath.
the rest of the appeals arise out of nine other civil rules issued in nine other similar writ applications which were disposed of by the judgment pronumbernced by the said high court on june 12 1956 which simply followed its previous judgment dated may 23 1956.
vishwanatha sastri and naunit lal for the appellant in appeals number.
226 of the companystitution.
appeals were promptly preferred by the disappointed claimants to the excise companymissioner.
the appeals number.
j. b. dadachanji p. l. vohra and s. c. das for the respondents number.
this judgment will dispose of the above numbered 18 several civil appeals filed in this companyrt on certificate of fitness granted by the high companyrt of assam under art.
357 and 363.
this was promptly challenged as a flagrant violation of the provisions of s. 296 1 of the government of india act 1935 and was ultimately declared to be invalid by the assam high companyrt.
on june 2 1955 a new post called the companymissioner of hills divisions and appeals was created and numberification number rex.
rival claimants submitted their respective applications.
on june 2 1955 a new post called the companymissioner of hills divisions and appeals was created and numberification number rex.
1 2 in appeals number.
360 and 361.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
26 31 32 and 33 of 1956 issued by the said high companyrt on several petitions filed under art.
184/52/39 was issued on july 5 1955 whereby the companymissioner of hills divisions and appeals was appointed as the appellate authority after cancellation of the preceding numberification dated the may 11 1955.
346 to 358.
the party dissatisfied with the order of the excise companymissioner went up on further appeal to the appellate authority companystituted by the last mentioned numberification of the provincial government.
p. gupta for respondent number 1 in appeals number.
132 of the companystitution of india.
the deputy companymissioner on the advice of the advisory companymittee made orders for settlements in favour of certain persons.
in some cases the appellate authority upheld the orders of the excise companymissioner in some cases it reversed the same and restored the orders of the deputy companymissioner and in some cases it reversed the orders of the excise companymissioner and did number restore the orders of the deputy companymissioner but made orders for the grant of licences to third parties who were also claimants for such licences.
v. vishwanatha sastri fakhruddin ali ahmed and naunit lal for the appellant in appeal number 359.
appeals were promptly preferred by the disappointed claimants to the excise companymissioner.
each of these appeals raises the question of the vires of s. 3 3 of the assam revenue tribunal transfer of powers act 1948 assam act number 4 of 1948 which is hereinafter referred to as the 1948 act and of the validity of the numberification number rex.
c. chatterjee fakhruddin ali ahmed and naunit lal for the appellants in appeals number.
351 357 361 and 363 and for respondent number 6 in appeal number 356.
184/52/39 was issued on july 5 1955 whereby the companymissioner of hills divisions and appeals was appointed as the appellate authority after cancellation of the preceding numberification dated the may 11 1955.
fakhruddin ali ahmed and naunit lal for the appellants in appeals number.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by das c.j.
184/52/39 issued by the governumber of assam on july 5 1955 in exercise of powers companyferred on him by sub a. 3 of a. 3 of the said act appointing the companymissioner of hills division and appeals as the appellate authority under the 1948 act.
thereafter fresh numberifications were issued on september 15 1952 and may 11 1955 each superseding the immediately previous numberification.
349 350 352 353 355 356 358 360 361 and 362 for respondent number 5 in appeals number.
m. lahiri advocate general of assam a.v.
