Section 269UN: Finality of Orders of the Appropriate Authority

What does Section 269UN provide?

Section 269UN states:

Save as otherwise provided in this Chapter, any order made under sub-section (1) of section 269UD or any order made under sub-section (2) of section 269UF shall be final and conclusive and shall not be called in question in any proceeding under this Act or under any other law for the time being in force.

The opening words "Save as otherwise provided in this Chapter" are significant: the rule is subject to provisions and mechanisms expressly contained in Chapter XX-C.

Which orders are covered by Section 269UN?

1. Purchase orders under Section 269UD(1)

Section 269UD(1) empowered the appropriate authority, within the statutory framework and time limits, to order the purchase of specified immovable property by the Central Government for the amount of apparent consideration. Section 269UN addressed the statutory finality of such orders.

2. Orders under Section 269UF(2)

Section 269UF dealt with consideration payable by the Central Government for property purchased under Chapter XX-C. Sub-section (2) concerned determination of an amount for damage to the property in the circumstances specified there. Orders under that subsection were also expressly covered by Section 269UN.

Section 269UN does not declare every action or communication of the appropriate authority final; it identifies these two classes of orders.

What does "final and conclusive" mean?

As a statutory finality clause, Section 269UN restricted ordinary challenges to the specified orders in proceedings under the Income-tax Act or other laws, subject to the Chapter's own provisions. It did not erase statutory requirements governing jurisdiction, procedure, hearing, reasons or time limits.

Other Chapter XX-C provisions must be read together with this section. For example, Section 269UJ provided a limited mechanism to rectify a mistake apparent from the record, and Section 269UH dealt with abrogation of a purchase order and re-vesting of property where statutory payment or deposit obligations were not met.

Does Section 269UN exclude judicial review?

No statutory finality clause can completely exclude the constitutional writ jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 226 or the Supreme Court's constitutional powers. A challenge to a historic order may therefore raise questions such as lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, non-compliance with mandatory procedure or constitutional infirmity. Whether relief is available depends on the facts, the applicable law and procedural considerations, including delay.

The Supreme Court's decision in C.B. Gautam v. Union of India (1993) 1 SCC 78 is important to the interpretation of Chapter XX-C, particularly the requirement of a reasonable opportunity of hearing before an adverse compulsory-purchase order and the provision of reasons. The existence of judicial review should not be confused with a general statutory appeal against every purchase order.

Key statutory terms explained

Appropriate authority

The income-tax authority constituted for purposes of Chapter XX-C, with the meaning and framework specified in that Chapter.

Immovable property

Property falling within the special definition in Section 269UA, which governed the former Chapter XX-C regime.

Apparent consideration

The consideration calculated according to the statutory definition in Section 269UA for a transfer governed by Chapter XX-C.

Order under Section 269UD(1)

An order for purchase of qualifying immovable property by the Central Government under the former pre-emptive purchase provisions.

Finality clause

A legislative rule limiting the avenues through which a specified decision may be questioned, without overriding constitutional judicial review.

Practical illustration

Suppose an appropriate authority issued a purchase order under Section 269UD(1) in relation to a property transaction governed by Chapter XX-C before the 1 July 2002 cutoff. Section 269UN would ordinarily make that order final and conclusive within the meaning of the statute. However, the parties would still need to examine any relevant Chapter XX-C exception and whether a constitutional challenge was legally available, for example because of a failure to afford a required hearing.

This example concerns the historical regime only. It does not imply that Section 269UD purchase orders can be issued for transfers effected today.

Frequently asked questions

Is Section 269UN applicable to property transfers in 2026?

Chapter XX-C does not apply to immovable-property transfers effected on or after 1 July 2002 by virtue of Section 269UP. Section 269UN may still be relevant to disputes about older orders.

Does it cover all orders of the appropriate authority?

No. It expressly covers orders under Sections 269UD(1) and 269UF(2).

Can a historic order be challenged in a High Court?

Constitutional judicial review is not completely barred by the finality language, but the availability of relief depends on the particular case.

Official legal sources and related reading

For the authoritative legislation and amendments, consult the India Code portal and the Income Tax Department. Confirm the version of the statute applicable on the date of any historic order.

Related provisions: Section 269UJ (rectification), Section 269UL (registration restrictions), and Section 269UP (cutoff).