Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (1.06 seconds)
State Of Maharashtra & Ors vs Man Singh Surat Singh Padvi & Ors on 14 February, 1978 cites

Jagannath Etc. Etc vs Authorised Officer, Land Reforms & Ors. ... on 11 October, 1971

Now, it appears that Subsequent to the judgment of the High Court and whilst the appeal was pending in this Court, the Ninth Schedule was as amended by the Constitution (Fortieth Amendment) Act, 1976 by the inclusion of the West Khandesh Mehwassi Estate (Proprietary Rights Abolition etc.) Regulation, 1961. The effect of the inclusion was that the West Khandesh Mehwassi Estate (Proprietary Rights Abolition etc.) Regulation, 1961 was immunised from challenge on the ground that it was inconsistent with or took away or abridged any of the right,-, conferred by Part HI of the Constitution and hence its constitutional validity could no longer be assailed on the ground that it violated Article 19(1) (f). Article 31B and the Ninth Schedule cured the defect, if any, in the West Khandesh Mehwassi Estate (Proprietary Rights Abolition etc.) Regulation, 1961 as regards any unconstitutionality alleged on the ground of infringement of fundamental rights and by the express words of Article 31B, such curing of the defect took place with retrospective operation from the date on which this Regula- tion was enacted by the Governor. This Regulation, even if inoperative or void at the time when it was issued by the Governor on account of infringement of Article 19(1) (f) of the Constitution, assumed full force and vigour from the date of its enactment by reason of its inclusion in the Ninth Schedule, (Vide : Jagannath v. Authorised Officer, Land 860 Reforms.(1) and it must accordingly be held to be constitutionally valid. Now, it was not disputed on behalf of the 1st respondent that if the West Khandesh Mehwassi Estate (Proprietary Rights Abolition etc.) Regulation, 1961 is free from any constitutional blemish, the Notification dated 24th February, 1962 cannot, standing by itself, be- successfully assailed as invalid, for, far from taking away any rights of the, 1st respondent, it restored his original rights as occupant. It was a legislative measure to his advantage and not to his detriment. The challenge to the constitutional validity of the Notification dated 24th February, 1962 must also, therefore, be rejected. We accordingly allow the the Appeal, set aside the judgment of the High court and declare the Notification dated 24th february, 1962 and the West Khandesh Maheshwary Estate (Property Rights Abolition etc.) Regulation, 1961 to be constitutional valid. There will be no order as to costs. We are told by learned counsel appearing on behalf of first respondent that the lands forming part of his estate have been included in his assessment of wealth tax and also in income has been assessed to income-tax. We do not know how far this. is true. But in case it is so the Central Government may sympathetically consider whether any such tax recovered from the first respondent from and after the date of coming into force of the West Khandesh Mehwassi Estate (Proprietary Rights Abolition Etc.) Regulation,. 1961 may in all fairness be refunded to him.
Supreme Court of India Cites 52 - Cited by 25 - Full Document
1   2 Next