Amjad Ali and ors. Vs. Mushtaq Ahmad and anr. - Court Judgment
|Court||Allahabad High Court|
|Judge||John Edge, Kt., C.J. and; Knox, J.|
|Appellant||Amjad Ali and ors.|
|Respondent||Mushtaq Ahmad and anr.|
.....and conditions of employees in certain private schools and provisions of the act shall apply to all private schools in the state whether receiving any grant-in-aid from the state government or not. private school is defined in section 2(2) of the act as a recognised school established or administered by a management other than the government or a local authority. recognised means recognised by director, the divisional board or state board. thus as far as the first part of the definition of being recognised is concerned, it includes, as stated above, four directors, the divisional boards and four state boards. the second part of this definition which comes after the comma refers to any officer authorised by director or by any of such boards. the question to be examined is.....john edge, kt., c.j. and knox, j.1. in our opinion bur brother burkitt rightly hold that the son of a muhammadan co-sharer in the village was not, merely in virtue of his birth, a co-sharer, within the meaning of the pre-emptive clause of the wajib-ul-arz. a muhammadan son does not take a vested interest in ancestral property on his birth, as a hindu son does. consequently the order of remand was right. but the court below should apply the principles expounded by the full bench of this court in bam nath v. badri narain i.l.r. 19 all. 148. we dismiss this appeal with costs.
John Edge, Kt., C.J. and Knox, J.
1. In our opinion bur brother Burkitt rightly hold that the son of a Muhammadan co-sharer in the village was not, merely in virtue of his birth, a co-sharer, within the meaning of the pre-emptive clause of the wajib-ul-arz. A Muhammadan son does not take a vested interest in ancestral property on his birth, as a Hindu son does. Consequently the order of remand was right. But the Court below should apply the principles expounded by the Full Bench of this Court in Bam Nath v. Badri Narain I.L.R. 19 All. 148. We dismiss this appeal with costs.