STATE OF ORISSA Vs. CHANDRASEKHAR SINGH BHOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Orissa has appealed to this Court against the judgment of the State High Court declaring "unconstitutional and invalid" Chapter IV of the Orissa Land Reforms (Amendment) Act 15 of 1965.

(2.) The Orissa Land Reforms Act 16 of 1960 (hereinafter called the principal Act) received the assent of the President on October 17, 1960. By Section 1 (3) of the principal Act it ws provided that the Act shall come into force in whole or in part, on such dates or dates as the Government may from time to time by notification appoint and different dates may be appointed for different provisions of the Act. By a notification issued on September 25, 1968 certain provisions of the principal Act other than those contained in Chapters III and IV were brought into force. By a notification dated December 9, 1965 Chapter III (Sections 24 to 37 dealing with resumption for personal cultivation of any land held by a tenant and related matters) was brought into force. But Chapter IV (Sections 38 to 52 dealing with ceiling of holdings of land and disposal of excess land) was not brought into operation. The Legislature of the State of Orissa amended the principal Act by Act 13 of 1965. By Act 13 of 1965 amendments were made in the principal Act: the expressions "ceiling area" and privileged raiyat" were defined by Cls. (5) and (24) of Section 24 and the expression "classes of land" was defined in Section 2 (5-a). The original Chapters III and IV of the principal Act were deleted and were substituted by fresh provisions. Nothing need be said about the amendments made in Chapter III because in these groups of appeals the validity of these provisions is not in issue. It may suffice to say that Chapter III (Sections 24 to 36) as amended deals with the right of the landlord to resume land for personal cultivation, the extent of that right, and the proceedings for resumption of land. Chapter IV as amended deals with ceiling and disposal of excess land. By Section 37 it is provided:

(3.) Chapter IV incorporated in the principal Act by Orissa Act 13 of 1965 when brought into force is liable to be challenged on the ground that it is inconsistent with or taken (sic takes ) away or abridges any of the fundamental rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution. It was urged however, and that plea has found favour with the High Court, that Section 47 incorporated by Act 1965 which provided for compensation not based on the market value of the land but at fifteen times the fair equitable rent is inconsistent with Article 31-A, proviso 2, and is on that account void. To appreciate the contention the constitutional provisions relating to protection guaranteed by the Constitution against compulsory acquisition of property may be noticed. By Article 31 (2) as amended by the Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1955, insofar as it is material, it is provided.