Salam Bin Salah vs Custodian of Evacuee Property

This writ petition has been directed against the order of the Custodian, Evacuee Property, at Hyderabad-Dn, It is apparent from the records that a revision petition, was preferred against the order of the Custodian before the Custodian-General at Delhi and the same was dismissed.

The question for determination is whether this Court can entertain a writ petition against the Custodian General, whose office is at Delhi, outside the jurisdiction of this Court. The learned advocate, for the Petitioner relies upon - Har Prasad Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Another, and argues that as the original order is of the Custodian at Hyderabad this Court could entertain the writ petition, though that order may have been confirmed by the Custodian General exercising his revisional jurisdiction.

We perused the judgment. We find no convincing reason, for the classification made in that judgment. That judgment has classified cases under two heads. In one class of cases it is stated that if the officer passing the original order whose order has been confirmed by the Custodian General is a resident within the jurisdiction of the High Court then a writ can be issued against him. But no such writ could be issued if the Custodian General has modified the order of the Custodian.

We fail to understand the difference between the nature of the two orders. Even when the order is confirmed in revisional jurisdiction by the Custodian General the final order would be that of the Custodian General and it will be difficult for the Custodian, resident within the jurisdiction of the Court to abide by a writ against the wishes of the Custodian General.

As a matter of principle when an order of a lower court or an officer is merged in the order of the higher tribunal or the superior officer, as the case may be it would be the order of the superior court which will be under consideration and not the order of the lower court.

For similar reasons we are unable to agree with the decision in - Barkatali Vs. Custodian General of Evacuee Property of India, .

This Court has decided in - ''Shaik Mahmood v. Custodian General of Evacuee Property AIR 1954 Hyd 33 (C) that this Court is not competent to issue a writ as against the Custodian General. For the above reasons we do not find any reason to entertain this writ petition. It is summarily dismissed.