PADMANABHARU GOVINDARU NAMBOODIRIPAD Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in these writ petitions challenge the validity of the Kerala agrarian Relations Act, IV of 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) mainly on the following grounds : (i) The Bill which became the Act had lapsed before it was assented to by the President and the Assent of the President was of no avail to turn it into law. (ii) The Act violates the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Articles 14, 19 and 31 of the Constitution. (iii) The properties of the petitioners are not Estates within the meaning of the expression in Article 31-A of the Constitution. (iv) The manner in which ceiling is fixed results in discrimination. (v) Compensation payable Is quite illusory and re-suits in discrimination. (vi) The classification of land for the purposes of the Act as well as the exemption of certain types, of plantations is discriminatory.

(2.) THE broad ground on which the petitions are opposed by the respondent, the state of Kerala, is that the lands in question fall within the definition of "estate" in article 31-A and that the legislation is therefore constitutional.

(3.) WE may observe at the outset that in view of the decisions of the Supreme court in Purushothaman Nambudiri v. State of Kerala, 1962-1 Ker LR 1: (AIR 1962 sc 694) and Karimbil Kunhikoman v. State of Kerala, 1962-1 Ker LR 67; (AIR 1962 SC 723) which cover all the grounds enumerated above except the third, arguments were addressed only on the question whether the lands held under the different tenures referred to in the petitions can be treated as "estates" as defined in Article 31-A of the Constitution. This question has to be answered in the light of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the two decisions cited above.