LAKHANLAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question of law involved being similar and the writ petitions being interlinked and interconnected were heard analogously and are hereby disposed of by this common order. As the pleadings are compete 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 profitablly refer to a paragraph from the decision rendered in the case of R.S. Joshi, Sales Tax Officer, Gujarat and others v.Ajit Mills Ltd. and another, (1997) 4 SCC 98 wherein Krishna Iyer, J. in his inimitable style expressed thus : ' '2. A prefatory caveat. When examining a legislation from the angle of its vires, the Court has to be resilient, not rigid, forward- ooking, not static, liberal, not verbal in interpreting the organic law of the nation. We must also remember the constitutional proposition enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Munn v. Illinois, viz., 'that courts do not substitute their social and economic beliefs for the judgment of legislative bodies'. Moreover, while trespasses will not be forgiven, a presumption of constitutionality must colour judicial construction. These factors, recognized by our Court, are essential to the modus vivendi between the judicial and legislative branches of the State, both working beneath the canopy of the Constitution."

(3.) THE score of facts which need to be stated in brief are that the Code was brought into existence by Act No. 20 of 1959 to achieve the designed object that is to say a uniform legislation on the subject, namely, regarding land revenue, agricultural tenures and other matters relating thereto in force in the different regions of the State. It may be stated here that the State of Madhya Pradesh was brought into being by M.P. Reorganisation Act, 1956 and with the aforesaid object the present statute was enacted by the Legislature. It is purtforth in the writ petition that it is a complete Code in itsef and it envisages how the land belonging to the State Government is to be dealt with and how the other rights of the private land owners are to be protected. We may hasten to add that there are numerous provisions dealing with various aspects with which we are not presently concerned. We Will be adverting to the relevant provisions at the [appropriate stage while dealing with the validity of the provisions which are called in question in the present writ petitions. It is averred that the Legislature has brought forth an amendment on 16.8.2000 and a part of ' Section 237 has been amended and thereafter vide amendment dated "27.9.2001 by M.P. Land Revenue Code (Amendment) Act, 2001 a further -amendment has been incorporated in sub-section 3. By virtue of the amendment the power has been conferred with the Collector to divert the land from the land set apart under section 237(1)(b) and further the terms on the basis of the resolution by the Gram Sabha to this effect" have been deleted.