MAYAVARAM FINANCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED MAYILADULURAI BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR R KALYANASUNDARAM Vs. REGISTRAR OF CHITS PONDICHERRY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON a preliminary point to the hear ing of a review petition by a Division Bench that interms of Order 47. R. 5 of the C.P.C. where the Judge or Judges, or any one of the Judges, who passed the dec ree or made the order, a review of which is applied for, continues or continue attached to the Court at the time when the application for a review is presented and is not or are not precluded by absence of other cause for a period of six months next after the appli cation from considering the decree or order to which the application refers, such Judge or Judges or any of them shall and no other Judge or Judges of the Court shall hear the same, a Bench comprising of two of us refer red the matter to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for constituting a larger Bench, and the case has accordingly been brought before us.

(2.) THE petitioner moved this Court in a Writ Petition No. 4015 of 1986 under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ or direction in the nature of writ to forbear the respondent from demanding or collecting any additional fee under S. 6 of the Pondicherry Chit Fund Act of 1966. THE petition was heard by Nainar Sundaram, J. who passed the order dated 23 1-1901 dismissing the same. THE petitioner preferred an appeal in W.A. No. 613 of 1982 2 . THE said appeal was heard by a Bench consisting of Mohan, J. as he then was and Bakthavat, salam, J. who dismissed the appeal by an order dated 27-9-1988 saying? ?After hearing Mr. K. Chandra Mouli, learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader, Pondicherry, we are of the view that excepting to clarify the following points, we do not think of interfering with the judgment. THE clarification is:

(3.) THE Constitution of India has created the extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Art. 226 and in Art. 225 thereof provided. ?Subject to the provisions of this Constitution and to the provisions of any law of the appropriate Legislature made by virtue of powers conferred on that Legislature by this Constitution, the jurisdiction of, and the law administered in, any existing High Court, and the respective powers of the Judges thereof in rela'ion to the administration of justice in the Court, including any power to make rules of Court and to regulate the sittings of the Court and of members thereof sitting alone or in Division Courts, shall be the same as immediately before the commencement of this Constitution; Provided that any restriction to which the exercise of original jurisdiction by any of the High Courts with respect to any matter concerning the revenue or concerning any act ordered or done in the collection thereof was subject immediately before the commancement of this Constitution shall be no longer apply to the exercise of such jurisdiction.? This has not only saved the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court but also the Letters Patent including the incorporation of S. 108 of the Government ot India Act, 1915 in Cl. 15 of the Letters Patent afore-quoted as also the rules framed by the High Court as provided under S. 108 (1) of the said 1915 Act until such time when the appropriate Legislature by virtue of powers conferred by the Constitution made any law on the subject.