http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: SMT. FIRDOSH FATIMA (SINCE DEAD) ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: SMT. FIRDOSH BEGUM (DEAD) & ORS. ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       06/02/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. HANSARIA B.L. (J) G.B. PATTANAIK (J)

CITATION:  1996 AIR 1588            1996 SCC  (2) 563  JT 1996 (2)   530        1996 SCALE  (2)272

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                             WITH                 CIVIL APPEAL NO.1657 OF 1977                          O R D E R      These two  appeals arise  from a Full Bench judgment of the High  Court of Allahabad in Hakim Singh vs. Shiv Sagar & Ors. [AIR  1973 Allahabad  596]. The  U.P. State Legislature enacted U.P.  Amendment Act  33 of  1972 amending  U.P. High Court (Abolition  of Letters  Patent Appeals)  Act, 1962 snd enacted Section 4 thereof which reads as under:-           "Abolition  of   appeals  from  the      judgment or  order of  one Judge  of the      High Court made in  the exercise of writ      Jurisdiction in  certain cases.-- (1) No      appeal,   arising   from   a   suit   or      proceeding  instituted   or   commenced,      whether  prior   or  subsequent  to  the      commencement of  this section, shall lie      to the  High Court  from a  judgment  or      order of   one  Judge of the High Court,      made in  the  exercise  of  jurisdiction      conferred by  Article 226 or Article 227      of the  Constitution, in  respect  of  a      judgment,  decree   or  order   made  or      purported to  be made  by the Board of .      Revenue under  the United Provinces Land      Revenue Act,  1901, or  the U.P. Tenancy      Act, 1939,  or the  Uttar Pradesh  Urban      Areas  Zamindari   Abolition  and   Land      Reforms Act,  1956, or  the  Kumaun  and      Uttarakhand Zamindari Abolition and Land      Reforms Act, 1960, or by the Director of      consolidation   (including   any   other      officer  purporting   to  exercise   the      powers and  to  perform  the  duties  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

    Director  of  Consolidation)  under  the      U.P.  Consolidation   of  Holdings  Act,      1953, anything to the contrary contained      in Clause  10 of  the Letters  Patent of      Her Majesty,  dated March 17, 1866, read      with Clauses  7 and  17 of the U.P. High      Court’s (Amalgamation)  Order, 1918,  or      in any other law notwithstanding.      (2) Notwithstanding  anything  contained      in sub-section  (1), all appeals pending      before  the   High  Court  on  the  date      immediately  preceding   the   date   of      commencement of  this section  shall  be      heard and disposed of as if this Section      had not been enacted."      By operation of this enactment, the power to  entertain letter patent appeal under Clause (10) of the Letters Patent dated March  17, 1866  read with  Clause (17)  of U.P.  High Court’s  (Amalgamation)  Order,  1948,  in  respect  of  the enumerated subjects mentioned therein stands taken away. The controversy  is   no  longer  res  integra.  This  Court  in Hasinuddin Khan  & Ors.  vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation & Ors. [(1980)  3 SCC 285] by a Constitution Bench has already upheld the  validity of the Act, following the ratio of this Court in  State of  Bombay vs.  Narothamdas Jethabai  & Anr. [(1951) SCR  51], Ram  Adher Singh  vs. Ramroop Singh & Ors. [(1968) 2 SCR 953 and Union of India vs. Mohindra Supply Co. [(1962) 3 SCR 497]. As a fact, this Court has upheld the validity of  Section 3  of 1962 Act in Mohindra Supply Co.’s case. It was held thus:      "The challenge  to  these  Acts  on  the      ground  of  the  unconstitutionally  is,      therefore, rejected."      In view of the decision of the Constitution  Bench, the controversy no  longer survives.  The legislative competence in abolishing  Letter Patents  Appeals in respect of revenue and tenancy  matters is  covered under Section 4 of the said Act. They  are under  respective legative  entries in  State List II in VIIth Schedule to the Constitution relating to jurisdiction and  powers of  all courts of administration of justice in  the State  of Uttar  Pradesh with respect to the matters in List II. Therefore, the Act stands upheld.      The appeal are accordingly dismissed. No costs.