Ultra vires rule-making: amendments to Delhi land revenue rules could not override the parent statutes and were struck down.

The Supreme Court of India held that amendments to Rules 49, 63, 65A and 67 and Form P-5 of the Delhi Land Revenue Rules were ultra vires the Delhi Land Revenue Act, 1954 and the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954. The statutory scheme required the record of rights and Annual Register to reflect cultivating or occupying persons across the covered areas, and Rule 63 could not validly exclude categories of land so that possession was omitted from the record. Rule 49 could not exclude extended abadi from field-to-field inspection, and the amendments to Rules 65A, 67 and Form P-5 were also inconsistent with the parent Acts. The amendments were therefore struck down as beyond rule-making power.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amendments made to Rules 49, 63, 65A and 67 and Form P-5 of the Delhi Land Revenue Rules were ultra vires the Delhi Land Revenue Act, 1954 and the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954.

Analysis: The statutory scheme required preparation and maintenance of the record of rights and Annual Register for all areas covered by the Act, and the entries were to reflect persons cultivating or otherwise occupying land, including tenure-holders and sub-tenure-holders. The amended Rule 63 excluded several categories of land from the operation of the rule, with the result that possession would not be reflected in the record of rights despite the statutory mandate. The amendment to Rule 49 similarly excluded extended abadi from the field-to-field inspection regime, although the Act did not authorise exclusion of any area from the duty to maintain the map and field book. The changes to Rule 65A, Rule 67 and Form P-5 were likewise inconsistent with the parent enactments. A rule-making authority cannot travel beyond the scope of the enabling Act or make rules repugnant to it.

Conclusion: The amendments were beyond the rule-making power and were rightly struck down as ultra vires.

---