STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY REVENUE AND FOREST DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA, BOMBAY Vs. JANABAI DEORAO KHATKE AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals by the State are directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court, holding that the provisions of section 5A of the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 (hereinafter called as 'the Restoration Act'), cannot be enforced as being violative of the second proviso to Article 31All) of the Constitution.

(2.) IN several petitions filed in this Court challenging the action taken by the State in pursuance of section 5A of the Restoration Act, the contentions raised were that the provisions of that section contravened Article 14 and Article 19(l)(f), and Article 31 (then existing) of the Constitution. The learned single Judge considered those challenge in his judgment, dated 29th/30th March, 1984 in Writ Petitions Nos. 1590 of 1977, 1099 of 1980 and 1444 of 1980 and held that the Restoration Act, prior to its amendment by Maharashtra Act XXX of 1977, was protected by Article 31A and also by Article 31B of the Constitution, as it was included in the IXth Schedule. In Writ Petitions Nos. 173 of 1978 and 541 of 1978, reported in : 1985 Mh.L.J. 265, which came to be decided by the learned Single Judge by the impugned common order, it was a common ground that the tribaltransferors were unwilling to cultivate the lands which they had transferred personally and to pay the purchase price as would be determined under section 3(4) of the Restoration Act and the authorities, therefore, directed under section 5A(1) of the said Act that the possession of the lands should be taken from the nontribal/transferees and be vested in the State Government free from encumbrances. The sole contention raised in the petitions filed by the nontribal transferees was that section 5A(1) as inserted by the Amending Act XXX of 1970 infringes the second proviso to Article 31A(1) of the Constitution.

(3.) THE challenge, which was raised and was upheld by the learned Single Judge was under Article 31A of the Constitution which, so far as material, may be extracted as follows :