REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

H. H. MAHARAJADHIRAJA MADHAV RAO JIVAJI RAO SCINDIA BAHADUR OF GWALIOR H. H. MAHARAJADHIRAJA MAHARANA SHRI BHAGWAT SINGHJI BAHADUR OF UDAIPUR COL. H. H. BRARBANS SARAMAUR RAJA-I-RAJAGAN SIR PRATAP SINGH MALVENDRA BAHADUR COL. RAJA SURINDER SINGH BAHADUR OF NALAGARH LT. COL. H. H. MAHARAJADHIRAJ MIRZA MAHARAO H. H. S. S. JHALADHI Appellant

V/S

UNION OF INDIA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

STATE OF SERAIKELLA VS. UNION OF INDIA [DISTINGUISHED]
N P PONNUSWAMI THE UNION OF INDIA AND STATE OF MADHYA BHARAT VS. RETURNING OFFICER NAMAKKAL CONSTITUENCY NAMAKKAL SALEM DIST :RETURNING OFFICER NAMAKKAL CONSTITUENCY NAMAKKAL SALEM DIST [RELIED ON]
STATE OF MADRAS VS. V G ROW:THE UNION OF INDIA AND THE STATE OF TRAVANCORE COCHIN [FOLLOWED]
ASWINI KUMAR GHOSE INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY CALCUTTA HIGH COURT INTERVENERS VS. ARABINDA BOSE [RELIED ON]
VIRENDRA SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [DISTINGUISHED]
DOMINION OF INDIA NOW UNION OF INDIA VS. SHRINBAL A IRANI [DISTINGUISHED]
UMRAO SINGH AJIT SINGHJI VS. BHAGWATI SINGH BALBIR SINGHMINOR [REFERRED TO]
RAI SAHIB RAM JAWAYA KAPUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [RELIED ON]
DALMIA DADRI CEMENT CO LIMITED DALMIA DADRI CEMENT LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX:UNION OF INDIA [DISTINGUISHED]
STATE OF SAURASHTRA VS. SALAM BIN HINDI [RELIED ON]
SUDHANSUSEKHAR SINGH DEO HRUAYA CHANDRA DEB BIRABAR HARICHANDAN VS. STATE OF ORISSA [DISTINGUISHED]
MADHAORAO PHAIKE VS. STATE OF MADHYA BHARAT NOW MADNYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
MAHARAJA PRAVIR CHANDRA BHANJ DEO KAKATIYA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [RELIED ON]
M R BALAJI THE MYSORE STATE CHATHADA VAISH NAYA ASSOCIATION MYSORE ARYA VYSYA MAHASABHA BANGALORE VS. STATE OF MYSORE [RELIED ON]
SOUTH INDIA CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED VS. SECRETARY BOARD OF REVENUE TRIVANDRUM [REFERRED TO]
S PARTAP SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
MAKHAN SINGH TARSIKKA SHAMSHER SINGH JOSH GURBUX SINGH ATTA DHANPAT RAI NAHAR DALIP SINGH MUTA SINGH DARSHAN SINGH JHABAL CHANAN SINGH DHUT KARNAIL SINGH FIDA SHRIMATI GODAVARI SHAMRAO PARULEKAR SHAMRAO VISHNU PARULEKAR PRALAD KRISHNA KURANE SHRIPAD YESH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB:STATE OF PUNJAB:STATE OF MAHARASHTRAS:STATE OF MAHARASHTRAS:TH [REFERRED TO]
H H THE MAHARANA SAHIB SHRI BHAGWAT SINGH BAHADUR OF UDAIPUR VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [RELIED ON]
JAYANTILAL AMRATLAL SHODHAN VS. F N RANA [RELIED ON]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. VORA FIDDALI BADRUDDIN MITHIBARWALA:VORA HAKIMUDDIN TAYABALI AMTHANIWALA:VORA FIDDALI BADRUDDIN MITHIBARWALA:MEHTA KANTILAL CHANDULAL:PATHAN ABBASKHAN AHMEDKHAN [RELIED ON]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. SHYAM LAL:RAM RICHPAL AGARWAL FIRM JANLAI PRASAD RAM NATH [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG WVG CO LTD [DISTINGUISHED]
NAWAB USMANALI KHAN VS. SAGARMAL [REFERRED TO]
RAM MANOHAR LOHIA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
RAM SWARUP VS. SHIKAR CHAND [REFERRED TO]
G SADANANDAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
JAICHAND LAL SETHIA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
RAJA ANAND BRAHMA SHAH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. SUDHANSU SEKHAR MISRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. RANNOJIRAO SHINDE IN C A NO 1730 OF 1966 2 KRISHNARAO SHINDE IN C A NO 1731 OF 1966 [REFERRED TO]
DHULABHAI VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
KUNWAR SHRI VIR RAJENDRA SINGH KUNWAR SHRI VIR RAJENDRA SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On September 6, 1970, the President of India passed a laconic order in respect of each of the Rulers of former Indian States. The order was served by a Secretary to Government of India. A sample order issued to the Ruler of Gwalior State may be read here :

(2.) This judgment and order will govern all these petitions. Since the issues involved in all the petitions are common and there are only minor differences in the steps before the States merged with the Indian Union, it is sufficient if an illustrative petition is dealt with. In this judgment I shall refer to the petition filed by the Ruler of Gwalior which is first on my list and embraces almost all the varying aspects of the question. The other petitions are identical except for some details which are special to a particular Ruler but are not material for the discussion of the issues involved.

(3.) The Ruler of the Gwalior State succeeded to the gaddi of the State on July 16, 1961 on the demise of his father. On August 15, 1947 the father had signed an Instrument of Accession of his state to the Dominion of India, as then established, and it was accepted by the Governor-General of India on the following day. This Instrument of Accession was similar to those which the other Rulers signed on diverse dates. It is to be found at p. 165 of the White Paper on Indian States and is exhibited with the Petition as Ex. A. On April 22, 1948 the father, as Ruler, signed a Covenant with other Rulers of this area and the United States of Madhya Bharat was formed on June 15, 1948. On the coming into force of the Constitution of India, the State of Madhya Bharat became a Part B State. On the passing of the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act 1956, Madhya Bharat State ceased to be a Part B State and was integrated with the State of Madhya Pradesh as provided under the States Reorganisation Act, 1956. I shall now say something in more detail about these several steps.

Click here to view full judgment.

H H MAHARAJADHIRAJA MADHAV RAO JIVAJI RAO SGINDIA BAHADUR OF GWALIOR H H MAHARAJADHIRAJA MAHARANA SHRI BHAGWAT SINGHJI BAHADUR OF UDAIPUR COL H H BRARBANS SARAMAUR RAJA I RAJAGAN SIR PRATAP SINGH MALVENDRA BAHADUR COL RAJA SURINDER SINGH BAHADUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address