CHANDMAL RATICHAND JHABUA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition by one of the money-lenders carrying on that trade in a scheduled area challenging the vires of most of the provisions in a body of regulations made by the Governor of Madhya Pradesh in exercise or the powers in paragraph 5 (2) of the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution and entitled the "madhya pradesh Scheduled Tribes Debt Relief Regulations 1962". They came into force on 15-8-1983 and have been subsequently amended by the amending regulations of 1963 (actually numbered 1 of 1964 ). There is also a body of rules made under the regulation No 26 of 1962. Both the original and this amending regulations have received the assent of the President; but the petitioner challenges the vires on the general grounds and besides has questioned their vires on grounds relatable to some of the more important regulations.

(2.) GENERALLY the argument is twofold; first, that these regulations having been made under Para 5 (2) (c) of Fifth Schedule to the Constitution by way of regulating the business of money-lending and not under Para 5 (2) generally for the peace and good Govt. of the area, these provisions could not have been made because they are so drastic as to shut out the business of money-lending altogether and not merely to limit or to control certain aspects of the conduct of that business. Secondly, the regulation being in effect restricted to claims existent on the day of the commencement, that is, 15th August 1963 and at the same time the moneylenders being categorically barred from moving the civil Courts, they are left without any remedy whatsoever in respect of claims arising after the commencement. In particular, several of the provisions are also challenged as being repugnant to some one or other of the provisions of the Constitution or to the principles of natural justice.

(3.) IT is convenient to examine the two general grounds before setting out the broad objections regulationwise and examining them for what they are worth.