STATE OF WEST BENGAL PLAINTIFF THE ADVOCATES GENERAL FOR THE STATES OF MADHYA PRADESH THE ADVOCATES GENERAL FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB THE ADVOCATES GENERAL FOR THE STATES OF ASSAM THE ADVOCATES GENERAL FOR THE STATES OF ORISSA THE ADVOCATES GENERAL FOR T Vs. UNION OF INDIA DEFENDANT:UNION OF INDIA DEFENDANT:UNION OF INDIA DEFENDANT:UNION OF INDIA DEFENDANT:UNION OF INDIA DEFENDANT:UNION OF INDIA DEFENDANT:UNION OF INDIA DEFENDANT:UNION OF INDIA DEFENDANT:UNION OF INDIA DEFENDANT:UNION OF INDIA DEFE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a suit by the State of West Bengal against the Union of India for a declaration that Parliament is not competent to make a law authorising the Union Government to acquire land and rights in or over land, which are vested in a State, and that the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act (XX of 1957). Which hereinafter will be REFERRED TO as the Act enacted by the Parliament, and [particularly Sections 4 and 7 thereof were ultra vires the legislative competence of Parliament, as also for an unjuction restraining the defendant from proceeding under the provisions of those sections of the Act in respect of the coal-bearing lands vested in the plaintiff. As will presently appear, the suit raises questions of great public importance, bearing on the interpretation of quite a large number of the Articles of the Constitution. In view of the importance of the questions raised in this litigation, notices were issued by this Court to all the Advocates-General of the States of India. In pursuance of that notice, the States of Assam, Bihar Gujarat, Madras, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh have appeared, either through their respective Advocates-General or through other Counsel. The National Coal Development Corporation Ltd. , with its head office at Ranchi in Bihar, has also intervened in view of a pending litigation between it as one of the defendants and the State of West Bengal as the plaintiff. We have heard counsel for the parties at great length.

(2.) The Plaint is founded on the following allegations. The plaintiff is a State, specified in the First Schedule of the Constitution, as forming part of India, which is a Union of States. By virtue of Art. 294 of the Constitution, all property and asserts in West Bengal, which were vested in His Majesty for the purposes of the Government of the province of Bengal became vested in the State of West Bengal for the purposes of the State. The State of West Bengal, in exercise of its exclusive legislative powers, enacted the West Bengal States Acquisition Act (West Bengal Act 1 of 1954). By notification issued under the Act, as amended, all estates and rights of intermediaries and Ryots vested in the State for the purposes of Government, free from encumbrances together with rights in the subsoil, including mines and minerals. The Parliament enacted the impugned Act authorising the Union of India to acquire any land or any right in or over land, in any part of India. In exercise of its powers under the Act, the Union of India, by two notifications dated 21/09/1959 and 8/01/1960, has expressed its intention to prospect for coal lying within the lands which are vested in the plaintiff, as aforesaid. Disputes and differences have arisen between the plaintiff and the defendant as to the competence of Parliament to enact the Act, and its power to acquire the property of the plaintiff, which is a sovereign authority. In paragraph 9 of the Plaint a controversy had been raised as to whether or not the proposed acquisition was for a public purpose, but at the actual hearing of the case, the learned Advocate-General of Bengal withdrew that contention, and, therefore, that issue is no more a live one. Notice under S. 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure is said to have been duly served.

(3.) The written Statement of the defendant does not deny the allegations of fact made in the Plaint, but denies the correctness of each and all the submissions or legal contentions as to the legislative competence of Parliament to enact the Act as to the power of the defendant to acquire any property of a State. It is also denied that the State of West Bengal is a sovereign authority. The following statement in paragraph 12 of the written statement beings out the policy underlying the enactment in question: