2014 (4) TMI 1257 - SC - Indian Laws

Supreme Court validates Land Manager's ejectment notices under Major Port Trusts Act

Universal Autocrafts Private Limited And Another, Sidhartha Sarawgi Versus Board Of Trustees For The Port Of Kolkata And Others

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the ejectment notices issued by the Land Manager under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963. The Court found that the ... Delegation of authorities - determination of leases granted by the Kolkata Port Trust to the petitioners - main contention is that the ejectment notice issued by the Land Manager is illegal and without jurisdiction as he is not competent to issue such ejectment notices - HELD THAT:- The power that is delegated to the Chairman as per Resolution No. 82 is the power to terminate a lease. The decision to terminate has been taken by the Chairman only and there is no dispute in that regard. In implementation of the decision thus taken by the Chairman to terminate the leases, the Chairman has authorized the Land Manager to issue the ejectment notices. The issuance of such notices is a mere ministerial act for the implementation of a decision already taken by the Chairman as delegated by the Board. The Chairman having duly authorized the Land Manager in that regard, it cannot be said that the ejectment notice issued by the Land Manager is without jurisdiction. It is not a case of sub-delegation. It is merely a ministerial exercise of issuance of a notice in implementation of the decision, as per the specific authorization in that regard. Admittedly, in the case of the petitioners, the lease deed has been executed by the Land Manager. The execution of the lease deed is as per the decision by the competent authority. If that be so, the lease can be terminated by the same authority who executed the lease deed, after a decision has been made in that regard by the competent authority. There is no legal infirmity in the impugned notices issued by the Land Manager of the Kolkata Port Trust - The power is exercised only as duly authorized by the Chairman. The Land Manager is also otherwise competent to issue notices after due decision has been taken in that regard by the competent authority since he is the one who executed the lease deed. There is no merit in these Petitions. SLP dismissed. Issues Involved:1. Delegatus Non Potest Delegare principle and its exceptions.2. Distinction between delegation of legislative and non-legislative powers.3. Authority of the Land Manager to issue ejectment notices under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963.Detailed Analysis:1. Delegatus Non Potest Delegare Principle and Its Exceptions:The principle 'Delegatus Non Potest Delegare' states that a delegate has no power to delegate. This judgment explores whether there are exceptions to this principle and the distinction between delegation of legislative and non-legislative powers. Delegation involves parting of powers by the person who grants the delegation and conferring authority to act as an agent or representative. Delegation is not the complete handing over of power but involves entrusting the exercise of a power with the ultimate power remaining with the delegator. The judgment emphasizes that delegation often involves granting discretionary authority, which is derivative and not an abdication of power.2. Distinction Between Delegation of Legislative and Non-Legislative Powers:The judgment distinguishes between delegation of legislative powers, which cannot be sub-delegated, and non-legislative/administrative powers, where sub-delegation may be permissible. Legislative powers involve determining legislative policy and enacting it into a binding rule of conduct, which cannot be delegated further. However, non-legislative powers can be delegated to perform ancillary and clerical tasks, provided the essential decision-making function remains with the primary delegate. The complexity of modern administration necessitates wide delegation of powers to various authorities.3. Authority of the Land Manager to Issue Ejectment Notices:The case involves the termination of leases by the Kolkata Port Trust, where the petitioners challenged the authority of the Land Manager to issue ejectment notices. The Major Port Trusts Act, 1963, allows for delegation of powers by the Board to the Chairman and further delegation to other officers. The Board passed a resolution delegating the power to terminate leases to the Chairman, who then authorized the Land Manager to issue ejectment notices. The judgment clarified that the issuance of such notices is a ministerial act in implementation of a decision already taken by the Chairman, and not a case of sub-delegation. The Land Manager, having executed the lease deed, is competent to issue termination notices as authorized by the Chairman.Conclusion:The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the ejectment notices issued by the Land Manager, stating that the power was exercised as duly authorized by the Chairman and that the Land Manager is competent to issue such notices. The judgment emphasizes the necessity and legality of delegating administrative tasks to ensure efficient functioning of modern-day administration. The Special Leave Petitions were dismissed, affirming the decision of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court.