Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"7. With greatest respect to the Hon'ble Judges and after perusing the same, I am in respectful agreement with the views expressed by Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Mohanty and, in particular, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Zile Singh (supra) where it has been held that, the presumption against retrospective operation is not applicable to "declaratory statute" and further that where a statute is passed for the purpose of supplying an obvious omission in a former statute or to 'explain' a former statute, the subsequent statute has relation back to the time when the prior Act was passed. The rule against retrospectivity is inapplicable to such legislations as are "explanatory and declaratory" in nature. In the case at hand, this Court in the case of Narayan Behera (supra) had already directed 'Kaibarta' to be issued with caste certificates having held the same to be synonymous with 'Dhibara' and since 'Kaibarta' has come to be included by way of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order (Second Amendment) Act, 2002 dated 18.12.2002, yet ever since the date of the judgment of this Court in the case of Narayan Behera (supra) came delivered on 05.11.1979, till the date of the Constitutional Amendment, the judgment of Narayan Behera was the law on the subject and the Tahasildar, Parjang, having acted in terms of the direction of this Court in the case of Narayan Behera (supra) (though at the time prior to the Constitutional Amendment), the certificate issued by him in favour of the petitioner was valid and could not have been declared void without any challenge thereto and consequently, for the reason noted herein above, this Court record its opinion and agrees with the views render by the Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Mohanty. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the aforesaid judgment." (emphasis laid)