Gopi Nath, J. - (1.) THESE two writ petitions are directed against the orders of the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 dated 11-7-1975, 31-7-1975 and 7-8-1975. By these orders M/s. Sheikh Saeed Ahmad and Co., the petitioners in Civil Misc. Writ No. 12057 of 1975, has been restrained from cutting and removing certain trees standing on the land by the side of the railway track from Sahadra to Saharanpur. The orders dated 11-7-1975 and 7-8- 1975 were passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Meerut and are annexures-8 and 9 to the writ petitions, while order dated 31-7-1975 was passed by the District Magistrate Saharanpur and is annexure-11 to the petitions. The petitioners have prayed for the quashing of these orders.
(2.) THE petitioner in Writ Petition No. 10008 of 1975 claims to be the owner of the trees in dispute having planted them on the land which was settled with them under an agreement with the Government of India for running a light Rly. from Sahadra to Saharanpur. They sold these trees to M/s. Sheikh Saeed Ahmad and Co., Saharanpur who are the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 12057 of 1975. Thus the petitioners in both the petitions claim to be the owners of the trees. The S. S. Light Railway Co. operated the light railway for some time but stopped it thereafter. The Northern Railway has now laid out a plan for the running of a broad gauge Rly. from Sahadra to Saharanpur. It, accordingly, made a request to the District Magistrates of various districts through which the railway passed to restrain M/s. Sheikh Saeed Ahmad and Co. Saharanpur from cutting the trees as they were needed for proper landscape and soil conservation of the area. The impugned orders were passed by the respective District Magistrates restraining the felling of the trees standing on the land adjacent to the railway track. The order dated 11-7-1975 said that since it had come to the notice of the District Magistrate, Meerut, that certain fruit bearing trees standing on the land acquired for the Central Government (Railway Department) on Shahadra-Saharanpur old S. S. Light Rly. track are being cut by certain persons he considered it necessary to order that no person shall "fell such trees standing on the aforesaid land which come under the limit of District Meerut". By order dated 7-8-1975 the same authority, after a detailed discussion of the circumstances ordered that the "order dated 11-7-1975 shall continue to operate with the slight modification" that it shall apply to fruit bearing and other trees as well. Copy of this order was sent to the Additional District Magistrate (E), Meerut for implementation. The District Magistrate, Saharanpur also issued similar orders and the one dated 31-7-1975 was a direction issued to the Tahsildar that no trees standing on the land of the Railway Track shall be allowed to be felled within the limits of that district. Since the petitioners claimed to be the owners of the trees they were aggrieved by these orders and have challenged them by means of these writ petitions. The circumstances leading up to this dispute were as follows: An agreement dated 11-10-1905 was entered into between the Government of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh and the Firm of Martin and Co. Under this agreement the Martin and Co. was given a right to construct and work what was subsequently known as Sahadara-Saharanpur Light Railway. Under one of the terms of the agreement the Government had agreed to provide free of charge sufficient land for the purposes of laying a railway track for operating a Light Railway. S. S. Light Rly. Co. started the railway and operated it for sometime. The land on which the Railway was operated was a part of United Provinces but later it was included in the Province of Delhi. The S. S. Light Railway Co. went into voluntary liquidation. During the time S. S. Light Rly. was operating between Sahadara and Saharanpur, number of trees had come into existence on either side of the Railway track and according to S. S. Light Rly. Co. by their plantation. On liquidation, the Company sold the rails and the trees to M/s. Sheikh Saeed Ahmad and Co. They wanted to remove the rails as also the trees but the authorities of the State Government stopped them from doing so. Two writ petitions were filed in this Court, being Writ Petitions Nos. 1676 of 1973 and 1778 of 1973. Writ Petition No. 1676 of 1973 was filed by S. S. Light Railway Co. praying that the orders by which its purchasers were restrained from removing the properties sold, be quashed. M/S. Sheikh Saeed Ahmad and Co. by means of Writ Petition No. 1778 of 1973 prayed for a direction to the State Government restraining them from interfering with their right of cutting and removing the trees purchased. These writ petitions were grounded on the footing that the State Government had no concern with either the land or the properties purchased by M/s. Sheikh Sayeed Ahmad and Co. from S. S. Light Railway Co. and hence the State Government had no right to interfere with the purchasers right of enjoyment of the properties. It was held in those writ petitions that the land on which the track was laid and over which the trees stood vested in the Union Government and not in the State Government, hence the State had no right to issue directions in respect of them. The writ petitions were, accordingly, allowed. On special leave the order was affirmed. The Bench also held that the State Government had no power to interfere with the petitioner's right of removal of the properties purchased by them. It was observed that the land vested in the Union Government and the State Government had no right in the properties sold. Thus "it had no right or jurisdiction to prevent the purchasers of the trees from the Railway Company from cutting and removing them". After the decision of the two special appeals it appears that the Northern Railway planned to run a broad gauge Railway from Sahadra to Saharanpur and found the trees standing on the track useful for soil conservation and landscape. A request accordingly was made on behalf of the General Manager, Northern Railway to the District Magistrates of Meerut and Saharanpur to issue orders restraining the private parties, namely, M/s. Sheikh Sayeed and Co. the purchasers of the trees from S. S. Light Railway Co. from cutting them. In the letter of request dated 10th July, 1975 it was stated that the Railway Ministry had undertaken to construct a broad gauge railway from Sahadra to Saharanpur and the trees standing on the track would be useful for proper landscape and soil conservation; hence orders be issued preventing the purchasers from felling them. In this letter no allegation was made about the commission of any offence in respect of the property involved or as to any apprehension of breach of peace. The request only was for executive action to assist the Northern Railway to implement its project. The District Magistrate, Meerut, gave directions to the field officers as follows: "Please issue orders today and then send to me". Similar orders were issued by the District Magistrates of Muzaffarnagar and Saharanpur. When the petitioners came to know of the orders they made a representation to the District Magistrate concerned. The Additional District Magistrate, Meerut by the order dated 7-8-1975 affirmed its previous order and again directed the petitioners not to cut the trees until the question of title to them was decided by a competent court of law as between them and the Union. It observed that since the Union's title to the trees had not been decided in the earlier writ petitions it was an open question even though the petitions had been allowed in the petitioner's favour. Thus without deciding any question of title and without referring to any rule of law, the orders dated 11- 7-1975 and 7-8-1975 were passed by way of executive action. The railway department had also approached the authorities for executive action and not for a decision of title to the property. A similar order was passed by the District Magistrate, Saharanpur. All these executive orders have been challenged on three main grounds: Firstly, that the impugned orders were not passed under any law and were accordingly bad. Every executive action, it was submitted, has to have the support of some law and since the impugned orders lacked such support they were void. Secondly, that the trees belonged to the S. S. Light Railway and Co. having been planted by them M/s. Sheikh Sayeed Ahmad and Co. being their transferee under a sale-deed acquired a title to them as owners; and Lastly, that in view of the decision in Special Appeals Nos.61 and 81 of 1975 the petitioners were the owners of the trees and the respondents had no right to interfere with their possession.
(3.) WE shall first take up the question of executive action and if the petitions succeed on that point other questions would need no consideration.;