'Ignoring A Constitution Bench Judgment Amounts To Material Error': Supreme Court Recalls Its 2014 Judgment
The Supreme Court of India has recalled its 2014 judgment which ignored the law laid down by a Constitution Bench in the case of Bhagat Ram & others vs. State of Punjab & others.
The Bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta observed that, "We find that ignoring the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of this Court in Bhagat Ram and taking a view totally contrary to the same itself would amount to a material error, manifest on the face of the order. Ignoring the judgment of the Constitution Bench, in our view, would undermine its soundness."
Senior Counsel Narender Hooda and Counsel Pradeep Gupta appeared for the review petitioner, while Senior Counsel Pradeep Kant and AAG BK Satija appeared for the respondent-State.
The original respondent in the appeal filed a review petition seeking to review the judgment of the Court which had allowed the civil appeal filed by the State of Haryana, against the judgment and order of the Full Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
The case arose from the State of Haryana's notification dated February 11, 1992, which amended the Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, by adding sub-clause (6) to Section 2(g). This amendment defined "shamilat deh" to include lands reserved for common village purposes and explained that certain lands, despite their recorded ownership, were to be considered as "shamilat deh."
Aggrieved by this amendment, the review petitioner and other landowners filed writ petitions. The matter was referred to a Full Bench of the High Court, which, on January 18, 1995, allowed the writ petitions, leading the State of Haryana to challenge this decision in the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court remanded the case to the High Court, directing it to reconsider the issues in light of Article 31A of the Constitution of India. The Full Bench of the High Court, on March 13, 2003, partly allowed the petitions, interpreting the amendment as clarifying existing provisions rather than changing them. It issued several consequential directions regarding land ownership and management.
The State of Haryana appealed this decision, and on April 7, 2022, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, dismissing the original writ petitions (referred to as JUR). The review petitioner then sought a review of this judgment.
The Supreme Court, on January 31, 2023, ordered that the review petition be heard in open court. On April 10, 2023, the Court granted permission to file the review petition, condoned the delay, issued notices, and scheduled a hearing.
The Court observed that, "except the cursory reference in paragraph 11 in the JUR, this Court has not even referred to the ratio laid down by the Constitution Bench of this Court in paragraph 5 in Bhagat Ram. No law is required to state that a judgment of the Constitution Bench would be binding on the Benches of a lesser strength. Bhagat Ram has been decided by a strength of Five Learned Judges, this Court having a bench strength of two Learned Judges could not have ignored the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in paragraph 5 in Bhagat Ram."
It light of the same, the bench recalled the 2014 judgment.
Cause Title: Karnail Singh vs State of Haryana & Ors.
Click here to read/download the Judgment
