Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 23 (0.41 seconds)
The State Of Vindhya Pradesh(Now Madhya ... vs Moradhwaj Singh And Others on 24 February, 1960 cites

Thakur Raghubir Singh And Others vs The State Of Ajmer (Now Rajasthan) And ... on 14 November, 1958

Applying this principle it is obvious that the Vindhya Pradesh legislature in this case had full competence to make this provision under Entry 18, List II of the Seventh Schedule. There is no question here of transgressing those powers and veiling the transgression under a pretence or disguise. We do not think it was proper for the Judicial Commisisioner to (1) [1954] S.C.R. (1) 113 ascribe motives to the legislature as he seems to have done by saying that the provision was made for creating inconvenience to a class whom the legislature did not like. Nor do we think that there is any force in the argument that art. 31-A has no application to provisions dealing with allotment of land, for ss. 7 and 22 of the Act work out the scheme of acquisition of estates and are incidental provisions which are equally protected under that Article along with the main provisions contained in ss. 5 and 6 of the Act; (see Raghubir Singh v. The State of Ajmer (now Rajasthan) (1). The provisions of s. 22 as a whole provide a scheme for carrying out the intention of the legislature expressed in s. 7(a) of the Act and are in our opinion perfectly constitutional.
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 16 - K N Wanchoo - Full Document
1   2 3 Next