DAYA RAM Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE questions of law involved being similar and the writ petitions being inter linked and inter connected were heard analogously and are hereby disposed of by this common order. As the pleadings are complete in W. P. No. 4072/2002, for the sake of clarity and convenience, the facts stated therein are adumbrated.

(2.) BEFORE we proceed to state the facts we may profitably refer to a paragraph from the decision rendered in the case of R. S. Joshi, Sales Tax Officer, Gujarat and Ors. v. Ajit Mills Ltd. and another, (1997) 4 SCC 98, wherein Krishna Iyer, J. , in his inimitable style expressed thus :--

(3.) WE have referred to the aforesaid paragraph for the sanguine and sacrosanct reason that in the present batch of writ petitions vires of certain amendments of Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for brevity 'the Code') and certain executive circulars issued in pursuance of the aforesaid amendment have been assailed on the bedrock of certain constitutional provisions as well as Judge made law and we are disposed to think that the seemly cogitation is to be done in the backdrop of the caveat. The modus vivendi which requires a purposive and constructive ratiocination while engaged in viceration of the provision also warrants that a policy decision, a facet of the Legislature or at times a spectrum of the executive though may draw strength and stimulus in all its variation from the greatest instrument, i. e. , the Constitution in a given case and in a particular fact situation if the provisions trespass the quintessential characteristic of Organic Law or Judge made law should not be allowed to stand.