The Nature of the High Court’s under Article 227 of the Constitution of India

In exer­cise of its powers under Art. 227, the High Court can quash simplicities an order of a subordinate court or tribunal which order is without jurisdiction and the exercise of his power does not necessari­ly involve giving a direction to the Court or tribunal in order to give it a supervisory character. In this case, the Munsif recorded the following findings in his order:

(i) It is not proved that the opposite parties and two others came into possession of a certain Dharamshala after the meeting of 17-9-1951;

(ii) The version of the applicants that they were dispossessed on 10-9-52 is correct; and

(iii) As the dispossession of the applicants at the hands of the opposite parties took place within 2 months before the order under Section 145, Cr. P.C. they would be deemed in law to be in constructive possession on the date of the preliminary order.

previews.123rf.com

After recording these findings, the Munsif ordered the record to be returned to the criminal Court. The City Magistrate made the ref­erence of the question of possession under Section 146 Cr. P.C. after the same was amended by the Criminal Procedure Code (Amend­ment) Act No. 26 of 1955.

The main ground on which the order of the Munsif was chal­lenged in petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution, was that proceedings under Sec. 145, Cr. P.C. having been initiated under the relevant provisions and as such proceedings were pending on the date of the commencement of Amendment Act No. 26 of 1955, the proceedings ought to have continued and disposed of as if the Amendment Act had not been passed in view of Sec. 116 of the Amendment Act.

It was contended that neither the City Magistrate was competent to send the reference nor the Munsif had any jurisdic­tion to record a finding on the question of possession.

The Allahabad High Court held that in view of the language of Sec. 116 of the Amendment Act No. 26 of 1955 the order of the City Magistrate dated 31-7-1957 referring the question of possession to the civil court and the order of the Munsif dated 27-3-61 containing the findings as to possession are without jurisdiction.

Unless there is any grave miscarriage of Justice or flagrant violation of law calling for intervention, it is not for the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 to interfere.

The powers of judicial interference under Art. 227 with orders of judicial or quasi-judicial nature are not greater than the powers under Art. 226. Under Art. 226, the power of interference may extend to the quashing an order on the ground of a mistake apparent on the face of the record.

But under Art. 227 the power of interference limited to see that the tribunal functions within the limits of its authority.