1. ) SYED NOOR AZMAN BIN SYED MD KAMAL 2. ) MOHAMMAD SYUKRI BIN JAAFAR 3. ) NOR MOHAMAD AZLI BIN YUSOFF v 1. ) PENGARAH TANAH & GALIAN NEGERI PERAK 2. ) PENDAFTAR HAKMILIK NEGERI PERAK 3. ) Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Kuala Kangsar

Case Significance

Illustrates the requirements of standing and proper joinder where a third party's land acquisition is impugned, and the principle that an administrative circular without statutory backing does not carry the force of law.

This High Court decision at Taiping concerns an originating summons by three plaintiffs challenging the acquisition, at auction, of land said to be Malay Reserved Land by a company alleged to be non-Malay, contrary to the Perak Malay Reservations Enactment. The plaintiffs sought declarations that the title in question was Malay Reserved Land forming part of a gazetted reservation, and contended that its purchase at auction by a non-Malay company offended sections 7 and 19 of the Enakmen Rizab Melayu (Perak) (the Perak Malay Reservations Enactment, F.M.S. Cap. 142), invoking Article 89 of the Federal Constitution, provisions of the National Land Code, and a federal Director-General's circular. The claim was brought against the state land and title authorities. The central questions were whether the plaintiffs had the standing to bring the action, whether Malay Reserved Land could lawfully be held by a non-Malay under the Enactment, whether the federal circular relied upon had the force of law, and whether there had been a breach of natural justice, in particular the audi alteram partem rule, because the company whose acquisition was impugned had not been joined as a party to the suit. On the circular, the court applied the principle that an administrative guide or circular issued without an enabling statutory provision does not have the force of law and is not binding on the court, and it found accordingly that the circular relied upon lacked legal force. On the whole, the court held that the plaintiffs had failed to prove their case on a balance of probabilities. Dismissing the application with costs, the court declined to grant the declarations sought. The judgment is a useful illustration of the requirements of standing and proper joinder where a third party's acquisition is impugned, and of the principle that an administrative circular without statutory backing does not carry the force of law.