Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the provisions of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Haryana Amendment Act, 1981 could retrospectively nullify or ignore prior civil court decrees and orders determining that the disputed lands were not shamlat deh and therefore were unconstitutional.
Analysis: The principal Act governed village common lands and the later amendment sought to bar civil court jurisdiction, confer adjudicatory power on revenue authorities, and validate past actions with retrospective effect. A Legislature may enact retrospective or validating legislation and may remove the basis of an earlier judicial decision by changing the underlying law. It may not, however, simply declare existing judicial decrees or adjudications ineffective or non-binding while leaving the legal basis unchanged, because that would amount to an exercise of judicial power. The impugned amendment, insofar as it merely directed revenue to disregard prior civil court decrees and orders recognizing private rights, did not alter the foundation of those decisions but attempted to override them by legislative fiat.
Conclusion: The retrospective operation of the amendment, to the extent it sought to nullify or disregard earlier civil court adjudications, was unconstitutional and invalid. The appeals were dismissed.