Sunder Lal v. State of Uttar Pradesh — 1976 DIGILAW 411 (ALL)

JUDGMENT S. Mubarak Hasan, M. - This is a reference made to us by a Single Member of the Board regarding the question whether the Gaon Sabha or the Land Management Committee should be impleaded as a party in proceedings under Section 198(2) of the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. 2. The facts and circumstances leading to the instant reference may be reproduced in the words of the referring Member himself. "This is a revision arising out of the order of the learned S.D.O. Bharthana in proceedings under Section 198(2) of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. 3. The learned S.D.O ordered that the lease executed in favour of Sunder Lal (the petitioner before the Board) be cancelled. The learned Additional Commissioner has recommended that the order passed by the trial court be set aside the mandatory provisions of Rule 178-A (2) of the Rule framed under U.P.Z.A.and L.R. Act have not been complied with inasmuch as the land Management Committee has not been impleaded. 4. It has been argued on behalf of the objectors that the interest of the Land Management Committee was adequately protected by the Gaon Sabha who was impleaded. In this connection my attention was invited to the view of the Board expressed in the cases of Murli v. Smt. Parvati, (1971 R.D. 23). In that cate. Sri Y.N. Varma, Member had held that the land Management Committee is a Sub-Committee of the Gaon Sabha and that the Gaon Sabha was impleaded as a party the Land Management Committee, will be deemed to have been impleaded. 5. The scheme of the Act is such that the legislature have always specified in the Act and in the Rules as to who shall be impleaded be it the State Government, the Gaon Sabha or the Land Management Committee and no provisions exists in law under which an interchangeability in the array of parties between public bodies like Gaon Sabha and the Land Management Committee is contemplated. Consequently the provisions of Rule 178-A(2) which mentioned the Land Management Committee and not the Gaon Sabha have to be interpreted literally. It has nowhere been defined that the Land Management Committee is a sub-committee of the Gaon Sabha. Consequently the provisions of Rule 178-A(2) which mentioned the Land Management Committee and not the Gaon Sabha have to be interpreted literally. It has nowhere been defined that the Land Management Committee is a sub-committee of the Gaon Sabha. It is an entirely different matter that the Land Management Committee may be constituted of person who are also members of the Gaon Sabha but this would not warrant an inference that the Land Management Committee is a sub-committee of anybody. I therefore am unable to subscribe to the view expressed by Sri Varam. 6. It would thus appear that there was a different of opinion between the referring Member and another Member of the Board who had earlier expressed the view in the case of Murli v. Smt. Parvati (1971 R.D. 23) that the Land Management Committee being a sub-committee of a Gaon Sabha it would mean substantial compliance of the provisions of law if Gaon Sabha and not the Land Management Committee was impleaded as a party in proceeding under Section 198(2) of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. Thus the short question which has been referred to us may be expressed in the form the following issue:- "Whether in proceeding under Section 198(2) which since the U.P.Land Laws Amendment Act of 1975 -Act No. XXX of 1975 - has become Section 198(4) and in accordance with the provisions of Rule 178-A (2) of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Rules, 1952 it will be necessary to impleaded the Gaon Sabha or the land Management Committee as a necessary party before issuing final orders." 7. Before proceeding further with the matter, it will be necessary to explain as to what is the exact connection of 'Gaon Panchayat', 'Gaon Sabha' and the 'Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti or the 'Land Management Committee 'as given in the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act (No. XXVI of 1947). According to Section 3 of the this Act, the State Government shall by notification in the Official gazette establish a Gaon Sabha for a village or a group of villages. According to Section 3 of the this Act, the State Government shall by notification in the Official gazette establish a Gaon Sabha for a village or a group of villages. Section 4 of the same Act lays down that every Gaon Sabha shall by the name notified in the official Gazette under Section 3, be a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal and shall, subject to any restrictions, or condition impleaded by or under this or any other act, have power to acquire by purchase gift or otherwise to hold, administer, and transfer property, both movable and immovable and to enter into any contract and shall by the said names, sue or be sued. 8. In other words, Section 4 of the Panchayat Raj Act confers upon a Gaon Sabha the status of a legal person. 9. Section 6 of the said Act goes on the indicate that every person whose name is for the time being included in the electoral roll of a Gaon Sabha shall be member of that Gaon Sabha. 10. The 'Gaon Sabha' is a different entity from the Gaon Panchayat. Section 2(h) of the Panchayat Raj Act lays down that 'Gaon panchayat' means the Executive Committee of the Gaon Sabha constituted under Section 12 of the Act. This section provides that the soon as may be after the establishment of the Gaon Sabha, there shall be constituted an Executive Committee called 'Gaon Panchayat'. 11. Section 28-A of the Panchayat Raj Act provides for the establishment of 'Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti'. According to this section, the Gaon Panchayat of every Gaon Sabha shall established a committee to be known as the 'Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti' (Land Management Committee) to assist it in the discharge of its duties of upkeep protection and supervision of all property vested in the Gaon Sabha under Section 117 of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1951 and all other property vesting in it or coming into possession under any other provisions of that Act. 12. This definition will go to show that the 'Gaon Sabha' the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti (Land Management Committee) and Gaon Panchayat are three different entities. The Gaon Sabha is a corporate body and a legal person created by the Statute. 12. This definition will go to show that the 'Gaon Sabha' the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti (Land Management Committee) and Gaon Panchayat are three different entities. The Gaon Sabha is a corporate body and a legal person created by the Statute. The Gaon Panchayat is an executive committee of the Gaon Sabha entrusted with a large number of the duties laid down in Section 15 of the Panchayat Raj Act. Apart from the mandatory duties and functions of the Gaon panchayat as laid down in Section 15 of the said Act, the Gaon Panchayat has also certain discretionary functions which have been set forth in detail in Section 16 of the U.P.P.R. Act and finally a 'Bhumi Prabandhak' Samiti or (Land Management Committee) is a smaller committee established by the Gaon Panchayat under Section 28-A of the Panchayat Raj act for the specific purpose of the proper upkeep, protection and management and supervision of all property vested in the Gaon Sabha under Section 117 of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1951. 13. Both the Gaon Sabha and the Land Management Committee have also been recognized as distinct entities in accordance with subs-section (3) of Section 117 of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1951. But for this provisions the different bodies formed as Gaon Sabha and the Land Management Committee would not have any official status or recognition for the purpose of agrarian legislation embodied in the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1951. 14. With this background of the statutory nature of the Gaon Sabha and the Land Management Committee we may examine some of the pronouncements of the various courts in this respect. The first reported case is of course the one adverted to by the referring Member- Murli v. Parvati, 1971 AWR (Rev.) 24 in which it has been held that the L.M.C. being a subcommittee of the Gaon Sabha it will be considered sufficient compliance with the provisions of rule 178-A (2) U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Rules if Gaon sabha is impleaded as a party in proceedings under Section 198 of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. The other case which is unreported is revision No. 12 of 1969-70/Badaun (Shiv Ram v. Bankey Lal) decided on October 13, 1971 in which another Member of the Board held that the law required that Land Management Committee should be impleaded through its Chairman and that the impleadment of the Pradhan in his personal capacity was not sufficient compliance with these provisions. In another unreported case of Jagannath v. Ram Lal, Revision No. 5 of 1967-68, District Farrukhabad decided on 13 December 1971 the referring Member in the instant case himself endorsed the view of the Additional Commissioner that the Land Management Committee was a mandatory party and that the failure to implead the Land Management Committee and the impleadment of the Gaon sabha in its place was fatal to proceeding. Finally, we have before us the case of Bangali Prasad v. State, 1973 RD 265 in which still another Member of the Board has held that although the failure on the part of the trail court to make Bhumi Prabhandhak Samiti as a party in the proceedings is an irregularity but in view of the fact that Pradhan was imleaded this would not constitute a material irregularity or illegality which may warrant interference in revision. 15. These being the views of the learned Members held from time to time we have now to examine whether the Gaon Sabha and the Land Management Committee are one and the same body or whether the impleadment of the Land Management Committee and not the Gaon Sabha is mandatory required by Rule 178-A (2) in proceeding under Section 198 of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. 16. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted before us that the history behind the substitution of the words 'Land Management Committee' in place of the Gaon Sabha is not generally known and has, therefore resulted in conflicting views. According to him conflicting views. According to him when the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act came into force it was the Gaon Sabha which was to be impleaded as party inn proceedings for cancellation of leases or patta. However, the position changed with the passing of the Act XXXVII of 1958. According to him conflicting views. According to him when the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act came into force it was the Gaon Sabha which was to be impleaded as party inn proceedings for cancellation of leases or patta. However, the position changed with the passing of the Act XXXVII of 1958. According to Section 23 of this Act, the expression Land Management Committee' was substituted for the expression 'Gaon Sabha in Sections 133, 178, 184, 187, 188, 194, 196, 198, 230, 274, 276, 277, 278, 282, 283 and 316 of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act. The leanred counsel especially drew our attention to the aims and objects of the 1958 enactment which deserves to be reproduced verbatim:- "Last two years' experience of the working of the Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1951 as amended by the Amending Act. No XVIII of 1956 has revealed certain shortcomings. For example powers conferred upon Goan Samaj as for enforcement of the various measures of Land Reforms by means of regular suits have been found to be quite cumbersome. There were also difficulties in the conduct of Gaon Samaj litigation." 17. The learned counsel has maintained that this amendment along with the statement of objects clearly shows that what is required by the Rule is the impleadment of the Bhumi Prabandhak Samiti or Land Management Committee and not the Gaon sabha. 18. The learned counsel for the opposite party has concurred with these views. Unfortunately, however we could not get the benefit of the argument of leaned District Government Counsel(R) who could not be present on the date of hearing. 19. We have given our earnest thought to this matter and we find ourselves in complete agreement with this view point. Crawford (Statutory Constructions by T. Crawford) has rightly observed that the preamble is an excellent aid to the construction of the ambiguous statutes or statutes of doubtful meaning and should be resorted to for unlocking the minds of its makers. Maxwell (Maxwell 'On the Interpretation of Statutes' by Langan 12th Edition) has also expressed a similar view and observed that preambles in which the main object of the Act are set out are legitimate side ion construing the enacting parts. According to G.P. Singh (G.P. Singh's Principle of Statutory Interpretation 2nd Edn.) a statue is an edit of the legislature whose purpose is to clarity the intention of its makers. According to G.P. Singh (G.P. Singh's Principle of Statutory Interpretation 2nd Edn.) a statue is an edit of the legislature whose purpose is to clarity the intention of its makers. A statute is to be construed according to the intents of them that make it and the duty of the judicature is to act upon the true intention of the legislature - the (sic) or sententia legis(Salmond 'On Jurisprudence'(11th Edn). And finally , Jagdish Swarup (Jagdish Swarup's Legislation and Interpretation' pp. 186-87)) has opined that preamble describes the objects of a statute and it is the preamble which makes it quite clear as to what the legislature had in contemplation. He has quoted the followed sentence from lord Normand- "The courts are concerned with the practical business of deciding a lis and when the plaintiff puts forward one construction of an enactment and the defendant another it is the court's business in any case of the some difficult after information itself of the legal and factual context including the preamble, to the consider in the light of this knowledge whether the enacting words admit of both the rival construction put forward. If they admit of only one construction, that construction will receive effects, even if it be an inconsistent with the preamble, but if the enacting words are capable of either of the constructions offered by the parties the construction which fits in the preamble may be preferred." 20. These observation of eminent jurists make it abundantly clear that the substitution of the expression 'Land Management Committee' for the expressions 'Gaon Sabha' in section 23 of the Act No. XXXVII of 1958 and the statement of the objects of this Act are quite conclusive to enable us to decided the question referred to us in very unambiguous terms. 21. Hence, holding that in the proceedings under Section 198 of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act read with Rule 178-A (2) of the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Rules the Land Management Committee and to the Gaon Sabha has to be impleaded as a necessary party. We answer this reference accordingly and send the file back to the court concerned for deciding the revision in the light of this answer.