SUBRAY NARAYAN HEBBAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is disposed of at the stega of preliminary hearing despite there bsing challenge to the consututional validity of Section 37 of the Karnataka Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1966 and Karnataka Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Rules, 1969.

(2.) Section 37A in substance empowers the State Government to exclude certain arees in iha State from the rigor of the provisions of the Act from such date and for such period, if any, as may be specified in the notification which the State Government is empowered to issue. The section reads as follows : "Power of State Government to exclude the application of the Act-Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the State Government may, by notification, direct that any of the provisions of this Act shall not apply to such areas from such date and from such period, if any, as may be specified in the notification." A notification dated 24-6-1983 has been issued by which previsions of Chapter II of the Act shall not apply to the districts of Dakshina Kannada and Uttara Kannada. The power to issue such a notification was acquired by Section 6 of Act No. 15 of 1979. Similarly, the lest sentence of Section 37A prescribing the time during which the notification shall be operative was introduced by Section 3 of amendment Act 19 of 1983.

(3.) Sri S. R. Hegde Hudlamane appearing for the petitioner has contended, the conferment of power under Section 37A on the State Government without any guidelines laid down by the legislature itself is conferment of arbitrary power and therefore the section is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. In the alternative, it is also contended, in support of the prayer that choosing Uttara Kannada and Dakshina Kannada districts as indicated in the notification is an arbitrary choice and therefore even if the section is held to be valid by this Court, the notification should be struck down.