CHANDAPPA Vs. SADRUDDIN ANSARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two revision petitions are directed against the notification issued by the former Government of Hyderabad under Section 39 of the Hyderabad Court-fees Act. The notification is No. 1 dated 20-1-1954 and published in Gazette Ordinary, Part I-D at page 70, January 21st, 1954. The notification is issued in the name of the Rajpramukh. It is as follows :

(2.) The validity of the notification is challenged on two grounds; (1) it is opposed to Article 14 of our Constitution and (2) that the Government exceeded the power delegated to it by Section 39 of the Hyderabad Court-fees Act. Section 39 of the Hyderabad Court-fees Act reads as follows : "The Government may reduce or remit, in the whole or any part of His Highness the Nizam's Dominions, the fees chargeable under the first and second schedules to this Act." This section is more or less analogous to Section 35 of the Indian Court-fees Act.

(3.) It is contended for the petitioner that the benefit of this notification is confined to displaced destitute persons in the whole of the Hyderabad State (former State) who during the period of two years commencing from 13th September, 1947 to 13th September, 1949 had been dispossessed of their immoveable property. It is urged that a valuable right is conferred on a class of people and as such the Government has contravened the constitutional direction contained in Article 14. This argument is totally void of merit. Article 14 of our Constitution does not guarantee a rigid and embodied equality. It merely guarantees equal laws for equal men. All that it inhibits is a hostile legislation directed against a particular class of people, may be, on political, religious or other grounds. The said article in no way prohibits the legislature or the delegated authority from classifying the people and enacting measures on the basis of that classification so long as the classification is a real and bona fido one. The equality clause is subject to the well known doctrine of classification. The Constitution does not guarantee that the laws enacted by the State will have equal application to all the people. Conditions of people differ; requirements of the several sections of people also differ. There are geographical, social and economic inequalities. Alt these call for separate measures. Article 14 is not a straight jacket. It is not intended to preserve the existing inequalities. It is not a negative doctrine. It is positive in its contents. Take this particular case; there can be no doubt that the displaced destitute persons are a class of people who deserve the sympathy of the Nation and the assistance of the State. The measure is intended to help these unfortunate men and women. The classification in question is not open to challenge and the measure is intended to carry out the objective which compelled the Government to adopt the classification in question.