H SHIVA RAO Vs. COLLECTOR OF MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the proceedings of the Collector of Madras, dated the 1 October, 1947, and to quash his order which runs thus: In virtue of the powers vested in him under Section 3(2), of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1946, the Collector of Madras is pleased to allot premises No. 16, Rajarathnam Street, Kilpauk, Madras, to Dr. C. Satyanarayana, for residential purposes with effect from 27 September, 1947.

(2.) The house in question was comprised in the estate of one Rao Bahadur H. Narayana Rao who died leaving behind him a will under which the petitioner was appointed executor. It is alleged in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the application that from about the end of 1942, the premises were occupied by Successive officers of Government or by Government institutions. On the 5 February, 1947, one Rao Bahadur R. Madhavachari who had been in occupation of the house vacated it, and the house was assigned to the Hon ble Mr. B. Venkata-ratnam, minister to the Government of Madras, with effect from the 5th February, 1947. The order itself was passed on the 8th. In accordance with that order, the Hon ble Mr. Venkataratnam occupied the premises from the 8 February, 1947, and vacated the same on the 25 March, 1947. Though Mr. Venkataratnam vacated the premises, it appears that the petitioner did not obtain vacant possession of the house. One Anjayya, editor of a Telugu weekly, came to occupy the pre-mises from about the 4 April, 1947. The petitioner attempted to obtain possession of the house for the use of the widow of the late Narayana Rao, the testator; but his attempt was not successful. On the 8 August, 1947, the Collector of Madras required the petitioner to furnish certain particulars regarding the house, and when the petitioner had complied with the request, the Collector passed an order on the 27 August, 1947, purporting to allot the house to the Educational Department for use as a hostel. The petitioner protested against the action of the Collector, but he did not get any relief. In supersession of the order of the 27 August, the Collector of Madras passed the order set out above on the 1 October, 1947. It is this last order that the petitioner seeks this Court to quash.

(3.) The order in question ex facie purports to be passed under Section 3(2) of Madras Act No. XV of 1946. The learned Advocate-General took a preliminary objection that any action taken under that sub-section by the Provincial Government or an officer empowered by them would not be a judicial act and any intimation by the Government or the officer under that Sub- section would not amount a judicial order which could be. quashed by a writ of cerliorari by this Court. To appreciate this contention, it is necessary to refer to some provisions of the Act.