Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

32. The epoch making event so far as the State of Goa is concerned, was the liberation of the territory on 19.12.1961 from the erstwhile colonial power of Portugal. The territories comprised in Goa, Daman and Diu under the Portuguese rule were annexed by the Government of India by conquest on December 16, 1961. By virtue of Article 1(3)(c) of the Constitution of India, these territories became a part of India. For the purposes of making provision for the administration of the territories, the President of India, in exercise of the powers conferred upon him by Article 123(1) of the Constitution, promulgated on 5.3.1962 Ordinance No.2 of 1962, called the Goa, Daman and Diu (Administration) Ordinance. On 27.3.1962, the Indian Parliament enacted the Goa, Daman and Diu (Administration) Act, 1 of 1962, replacing the aforesaid Ordinance with effect from 5.3.1962. On the same date, the Parliament enacted the Constitution (Twelfth Amendment) Act, 1962, whereby Goa, Daman and Diu were added as Entry 5 in Part II of the First Schedule to the Constitution and as clause (d) in Article 240 of the Constitution with retrospective effect from 20.12.1961. Thus, Goa, Daman and Diu became a part of the Union Territories of India with effect from the date of their annexation by conquest. After liberation of Goa from the Portuguese rule and on Goa becoming a part of territory of India, all erstwhile Portuguese citizens residing in the territory of Portuguese India acquired Indian citizenship and all the statutory orders issued by the Governor General of State of India, issued in exercise of powers conferred on him under the Portuguese Constitution, ceased to be operative.

35. Turning to the facts of this cas in hand, assuming for the sake of argument that the petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 had some rights against the Portuguese Government to take part in the management of the institute which, in our opinion, has come to an end with the conquest of Goa by the Government of India on 20.12.1961. In absence of any allegation that the right was re - granted either by a private agreement or by executive fiat, the sole question is whether the said petitioners have any legal right to claim interest in the management of the institute in question after 20.12.1961. The another incidental question would be whether the continuance, ipso facto, of the old laws after the conquest or annexation would tantamount to recognition, without more, of the rights and privileges, if any, accruing under those laws. Secondly, the general rule is naturally subject to any specific provision to the contrary which the new Government may make. These questions posed are on the similar lines as were posed in the case of Vinodkumar v. Gangadhar in which they were answered by the Apex Court in the case of Vinodkumar vs. Gangadgar relying on its earlier judgment in Prema Chibar v. Union of India, .

36. The decision in Prema Chibar v. Union of the laws which were in force in the conquered territory are continued by the new Government after the conquest is not by itself enough to show that the new sovereign has recognised the right under the old laws; and, the rights which arose out of the old laws prior to the conquest or annexation can be enforced against the new sovereign only if he has chosen to recognise those rights; and, that the period between 20.12.1961 when the territories comprised in Goa, Daman and Diu were annexed by the government of India and 5.3.1962 when the Administration Act came into force, was a period of interregnum.

39. In the instant case, there is no material on record to suggest that at any point of time the alleged rights of petitioner Nos.2 to 4 to take part in the management of the said Institute IVG were recognised either during interregnum or thereafter or any point of time subsequent thereto by the Government of Goa. In absence of any material in this behalf, assuming for the sake of argument that petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 had some right to take part in the management of the said Institute IVG, those rights, in our opinion, have come to an end and in absence of any allegation that the right was re granted either by any private agreement or by executive fiat, the rights of petitioner Nos. 2 to 4, if any, automatically came to an end when the territories comprises in Goa, Daman and Diu under the Portuguese Rules were annexed by the Government of India by conquest on 20.12.1961. In this backdrop, assuming that in the said Institute petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 had some rights to take part in the management of the Institute, may be because of the blessings of the then Government, even then those rights came to an end on 20.12.1961 when the territories comprised in Goa, Daman and Diu under the Portuguese Rule were annexed by the Government of India by conquest. Therefore, it is not possible to hold that any of the alleged members of the said Institute IVG including petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 were in the management of the said Institute in their individual rights, at any rate, after 20.12.1961.