By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

10 – (2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1) the President mayrevoke a right of occupancy if, in his opinion, it is in the public interest so to do.3) Where a right of occupancy is revoked under this section such revocation shalltake effect and be valid notwithstanding any provision to the contrary containedin any other written law or any order made or issued by any court prohibiting theoccupier from transferring or otherwise disposing of his interest in the land or ofany unexhausted improvement existing on the land.The learned trial judge in the court of considering the powers of the Presidentunder the provisions of subsections (1) and (2) of s. 10 discussed the questionwhether the President’s functions under the two subsections were quasi-judicialor executive. He dealt with the matter thus.In my opinion, I would say that the function of the President under subsection (1)of s. 10 of the Land Ordinance is a quasi-judicial function. Because, it seems tome, the exercise of his discretion under that provisions must be conditioned byfinding of facts such as are set out there under. It basically entails the finding thatthe holder of the right of occupancy has committed some wrong in respect of histitle. In my opinion I would say that he is under no duty to act judicially. He couldthroughout consider the matter from policy standpoint. I am prepared to acceptthat the revocation order in this case was made under subsection (2). I hold thatit was a purely executive action.638