A. G. QNRESHI. J. ( 1 ) THE Petitioner no. 1 in the present petition is a society formed in 1903 and is registered under the Societies Registration act, bearing registration no 105 dated 31-8 -1903. The petitioners nos 2 to 6 are purchasers of part of the land belonging to the petitioner no 1 society which was sold to them by registered sale deed dated 20 12 1991. The petitioners owned and possessed open land situated at R. N. Tagore marg, Indore with a small superstructure admeasuring about 100761 sq. ft. The land devolved on the petitioner no. 1 by registered release deed dated 10-11-1960 bearing no 1762. The petitioner no. 1 applied for the sanction of a site plan to the Municipal Corporation, Indore but before the sanction of the plan the Municipal Corporation authorities insisted on a no objection certificate from the competent officer. The petition no. 1 therefore, made an application to the competent authority saying that althouh the provisions of Section 6 ot the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulations) Act, 1976 (hereinafter called the Act) do not apply to petitioner no 1 as it is a registered society, still it wants a certificate in view of the requirement of the Municipal Corporation, Tndore therefore, a certificate under the Act be granted to them under Section 19 (1) (vii ). After an equiry the same was granted to petitioner no. 1, vide order dated 6- 6-86, whieh is Annexure-P 4 to the petition. Thereafter the petitioner no. 1 sold about 50. 000 sq ft. of land from the land belonging to the petitioner to petitioners nos. 2 to 6 by registered sale deed execution 20 12. 91 (Annexure p 3 ). The competent authority has issued notice dated 24. 8. 92 and letter dated 5 9 92 to petitioner no. 1 aggrieved ty which they have filed this petition challenging the notice seeking the cancellation of the certificate annexure-P4 granted to the society. ( 2 ) THE grievance of the petitioners is that the petitioner no. 1 being a society falling within the purview of Section 19 of the Act, the provisions of Chapter-Ill of the Act are not applicable to the petitioner society and therefore, it was not necessary for the petitioner-society to file any return under S. 6 of the Act. ( 2 ) THE grievance of the petitioners is that the petitioner no. 1 being a society falling within the purview of Section 19 of the Act, the provisions of Chapter-Ill of the Act are not applicable to the petitioner society and therefore, it was not necessary for the petitioner-society to file any return under S. 6 of the Act. However, on the insistence of the Municipal Corporation, Indore an application for exemption was filed, which was righly allowed by the competent authority and the building plans were also sanctioned by the Municipal corporation, indore and the construction had already been started notices Annexures-P7 and P-9 sent by the authorities are without jurisdiction for two reasons one that the society falls under Section 19 (1) (vii) of the act, as the society has been registered for non-profit and non-commercial purposes and the sale proceeds shall also be used for non-commercial and non-profitable purposes. The Art:cles and Rules of the society also permit the sale of any property of the society for being used to carry on the society. Therefore, the society is automatically exempt by the Statutory clause Secondly, when once the exemption was granted by the authority after holding a detailed enquiry, the notice for reviewing the same is clearly without jurisdiction because power of review has not been given to any authority under the Act and it is a settled principle of law that if under an enactment a power of review is not given to any authority, the power of review cannot be exercised therefore, on both the aforesaid reasons the notices issued by the competent Authority are without jurisdiction aid, therefore, they be quashed. ( 3 ) THE State has resisted the petition mainly on the ground that the and once transferred by the society attracts the provisions of tas Act because the land of the socieiy is exempt from the Act only till it is with the society. Jf it is used, not for tne purpose of the society a-id for some other purpose, the exemption automatically comes u an jnd. It. las also been pjeaded that he socieiy had no right to sell the land without seeking permission from the competent authority and a sale without seeking such permission under Section 27 of the Act is illegal. Jf it is used, not for tne purpose of the society a-id for some other purpose, the exemption automatically comes u an jnd. It. las also been pjeaded that he socieiy had no right to sell the land without seeking permission from the competent authority and a sale without seeking such permission under Section 27 of the Act is illegal. The provision of Sections 26 and 27 of the Act are applicable in the instant case it has also been stated that the land can remain exempt only till the society uses it for non-commercial or non-profit use. But ones the use is commercial or prohitable then the exemption of the society comes to an end, it has also been plea led that the transfer of the land is in violation of the societies Registration Act, and, therefore, the transfer itself is void. It has further been pleaded that the execution of the sale-deed is also not in accordance with law. A plea has also been taken about the under valuation of the land. By a special pleading it has be:n stated that the sale itself is against the objects of the society and the society has earlier taken a plea in acquisition proceedings for keeping the land with itself that is why the sale is also against Us earlier declaration. ( 4 ) THE learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner no. 1 shri J. W. Mahajan and learned counsel for petitioner nos 2 to 6 Shri oberai have vehemently argued that the notice itself is without jurisdiction because there is no provision the Act for reviewing the earlier order passed by the authority and unless such a power is given under the Act the authority concerned is not empowered to review its earlier order. ( 5 ) ON the other hand Shri Upadhyaya, deputy Advocate General states that when there is a violation of the conditions of exemption, then the authority is empowered to cancel the sanction is issued by it earlier. ( 6 ) ACCORDING to us, it is a well settled principle that the order passed by an authority can be reviewed by the authority only when such a power is given to that authority under the Act from which such authority derives power of review. ( 6 ) ACCORDING to us, it is a well settled principle that the order passed by an authority can be reviewed by the authority only when such a power is given to that authority under the Act from which such authority derives power of review. if a power has not been given by a particular enactment, then the authority has got no power to review its earlier order. Now if we consider the reason for issuance of notices Annexure-P7 and Annexure-P9 we find that those Notices have been given to the society on the ground that the transfer of land by the society is against the objects of society and, therefore, why the exemption granted be not cancelled Similarly notice Annexure-P9 is asking the society to stop the construction work in pursuance to the exemption certificate issued to the society. Therefore, basically the notices have been issued on the ground that the land has been transferred against the objects of the society. The objects of the society are contained in the constitution Articles and Rules of the Indian Section of the Theosophical society, 1979 wherein various objects of the society have been stated. In the Memorandum of Association sub-clause (f) of clause 2 reads as under : (f) The sale, improvement, management and development of all or any part of the property of the Association as such it is manifest that the society is entitled to sell, make improvement or develop all or any part of the property of the Association and, therefore, selling the property for using the sale proceeds in furtherance of the cause of the society is one of the clauses of the memorandum of association. ( 7 ) CLAUSE 4 of the memorandum of Association is as follows ;"4, The income and property of the Association, when howsoever derived shall be applied solely towards the promotion of the objection of the Association as set forth in the Memorandum of Association, end no portion thereof shall be paid or transferred directly by way of dividend, bonus or otherwise howsoever by of profits to the persons who at any time are or have been members of the Association or to any of them or to any person claiming through any of them. Provided that nothing herein contained shall prevent the payment in good faith of remuneration to any officers or servants of the association or to any member thereof or other person in return for any service rendered to the Association. "this clause makes it abundantly clear that the proceeds of the sale have to be used for the society In other words the land of the society or property of the society has to be used for non-profit and non-commercial purposes and if any income is derived from such property or if any property of the society is sold then such sale proceeds have to be used for non-pro6t and noncommercial purposes and the income from the property shall be used only for the furtherance of the cause of the society, except the payment of salary or honorarium etc. as has been provided in clause 4 of the Memorandum of association. As such it cannot be said that the sale of the property by the society is against the objects of the society and, therefore, the exemption granted to the society conies to an end. ( 8 ) IT has been argued by the Deputy Advocate General that the registration favour of respondents nos. 2 to 6 is against the law of Registration and, therefore, the registration is void. Without going into the merits of the registration we may say that the Act does not empower the competent authority to examine the legality or otherwise of the registration. The registration of document is made under a different Act and it is the authorities under that Act which can look into that provision. ( 9 ) IT has also been argued that without the permission of the competent authority the transfer could not be made. In reply to the aforesaid argument it has been stated by the counsel for the petitioners that the provisions of chapter HI of the Act are not applicable to the society by virtue of Section 19 (1) (vii) of the Act, therefore, the provisions of Section 26 and Section 2 are not attracted at all and Section 27 has been held partly ultra vires by the Supreme Court. Therefore, this argument is without any force. Therefore, this argument is without any force. Reading of the opening words of sub-section (I) of Section 19 would clearly make out that the provisions of Chapter III shall not apply to the vacant land held by the institutions enumerated in Section 19, wherein at no. (vii) any society registered under the societies Registration Act, 1860, or any other corresponding law for the time being in force and used for any non-profit and non-commercial purpose, is clearly exempt The petitioner no 1 is clearly such a Society and, therefore the provisions of Stctions 26 and 27 of the Act are also not attracted. ( 10 ) IN view of the aforesaid discutsion it Is clear that the notice, annexure-P7 issued by the competent Authority and Annexure-P9 issued in pursuance to the notice Annexure P7 asking the petitioner to show cause why the exemption granted to the society be not cancelled are without jurisdiction because firstly the authority has no power to review the earlier order and secondly the transfer made by the society facts within the objects of the society and the funds derived by the society have to be used for nonprofit and non-commercial purpose. ( 11 ) IT may also be made clear that this order pertaining to the society shall not be construed to mean that the competent authority shall be precluded from proceeding against the purchasers if any of the transferees is found in possession of land in excess of the ceiling limit provided by the law. ( 12 ) IN the result this petition is allowed. The notices Annexures-p7 and P-9 issued against the society petitioner no. 1 are quashed. In the circumstances of the case, however, there shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed. .