C. Setalvad, Attorney General for india, H. N. Sanyal, Additional Solicitor General of India, Bishan Narain, N. S. Bindra and R. H. Dhebar, for the defendant.
M. Sikri, Advocate General for State of Punjab, and P. Xenon, for Intervener No.
M. Bose,, Advocate General for the State of West Bengal, B. Sen, S. C.Bose, Milon K. Bunerjee, P. K. Chatterjee, and P. K. Bose, for the plaintiff.
D. Xenon, for Intervener No.
December 21.
N. Seib and I. N. Shroff, for the Intervener No.
M. Sikri, Advocate General for the State of Punjab, R. Ganapathy Iyer and P. D. Menon, for Intervener No.
the public sector should produce an additional 12 million tons per annum, the balance being allocated to the private industry for production from existing companylieries and immediately companytiguous areas.
4 and 7 thereof, were ultra vires the legislative companypetance of Parliament, as also for an injunction restraining the defendant from proceeding under the provisions of these sections of the Act in respect of the companyl bearing lands vested in the plaintiff.
S. Pathak, N. S. Bindra and R. H. Dhebar, for Intervener No.
C. Barua, Advocate General for the State of Assam and Naunit Lal, for the Intervener No.
The production of companyl in India in 1953 was 38 million tons and the target for production for the Second Five Year Plan has been fixed at 60 million tons per annum.
1 of 1961.
Ranganadhan Chetty and A. V. Rangam, for Intervener No.
As the amendment sought was number opposed, it was granted and an additional issue was raised in these terms Whether Act XX of 1957 on its true companystruc tion applies to lands vested in or owned by the Plaintiff State?
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Suit No.
S. Hajela and C. P. Lal, for Intervener No.
was delivered by Sinha, J., Subba Rao, J., delivered a separate judgment.
Out of the additional 12 million tons in the public sector, the bulk 10 million tons per annum will have to be raised by the development of new companyl fields, such as Korba, Karanpura, Kathara and Jhilimili and Bisrampur.
SINHA, C. J. This is a suit by the State of West Bengal against the Union of India for a declaration that Parliament is number companypetent to make a law authorising the Union Government to acquire land and rights in or over land, which are vested in a State, and that the Coal Bearing Areas Acquisition and Development Act XX of 1957 which hereinafter will be referred to as the Act enacted by the Parliament, and particularly ss.
Narayan Sinha, and D. Goburdhan, for Intervener No.
After the arguments on behalf of the plaintiff, and of the States in support of the plaintiff, had been finished, application was made for amendment of the plaint praying that the following paragraph may be added as paragraph 9A, which is as follows Alternatively the plaintiff submits that the Coal Bearing Areas Acquisition and Develop ment Act Act XX of 1957 on its true companys truction does number apply to the lands vested in or owned by the Plaintiff the State of West Bengal.
In pursuance of that numberice, the States of Assam, Bihar, Gujarat, Madras, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh have appeared, either through their respective AdvocatesGeneral or through other Counsel.
The Judgment of Sinha, C. J., Imam, Shah, Ayyangar and Mudholkar, JJ.,
Dinabandhu Sahu, Advocate General for the State of Orissa, K. P. Sinha and P. D. Ale on, for the Intervener No.
Hence it is proposed to take power to acquire unworked companyl bearing areas companyered by private leases or prospecting licencees which are found surplus to the production required in the private sector and to work these areas as lessees of the State Government.
Further the numberifications purported to have been issued under the said Act are void and of numbereffect.
