The appellants also gave an undertaking that they would number press their appeals before the Tribunal in respect of 10315 acres of land.
This section extended the period for the setting up of joint farming societies companytemplated by section 28 of the principal Act by one year.
27 of 1961 hereinafter referred to as the principal Act as amended by Maharashtra Acts Nos.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KHANNA, J. The short question which arises in this appeal filed on certificate by Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. and its two shareholder directors against the judgment of the Bombay High Court is the companystitutional validity of Maharashtra Agricultural Lands Ceiling on Holdings Act, 1961 Maharashtra Act No.
On May 17, 1968 amending Act 16 of 1968 was published.
The judgment of this Court is reported in 1968 3 SCR 712.
16 of 1968, 33 of 1968, 37 of 1969 and 27 of 1970.
907 E 908 C Ranjit Singh v. State of Punjab 1965 1 S.C.R. 82, followed.
Niren De, Attorney General of India and M. N. Shroff, for the respondents 1 4.
It may be stated that a stay order was made during the pendency of the appeal filed by the appellants.
After the dismissal of the appeal on application filed by the respondents, the companynsel for the appellants gave an undertaking on April 26, 1968 to deliver possession of 10315 acres of land on or before May 2.
The principal Act came into force on January 26, 1962.
Accordingly, on July 22, 1968 the Maharashta Revenue Tribunal dismissed the appeals of the appellants in respect of 10317 acres 37 gunthas of land.
The appeals regarding the rest of the land measuring 1829 acres were kept pending in view of the injunction issued by the High Court.
The appellants came up in appeal to this Court against the judgment of the Bombay High Court but that appeal was dismissed by this Court on April 10, 1968.
As the joint farming societies referred to in section 28 had number yet been formed, till such formation the said land along with some other land taken over from others in similar circumstances was given for cultivation to the Maharashtra State Farming Corporation Limited respondent No.
On December 28, 1968 amending Act 33 of 1968 was published.
Possession of 10315 acres of land in pursuance of the above undertaking was handed over by the appellant companypany in May 1968.
The appellant companypany owns two factories for the manufacture of sugar and allied products.
On June 26, 1968 the appellants filed petition under article 226 and 227 of the Constitution for a declaration that the principal Act as amended by Act 16 of 1968 was unconstitutional Interim injunction was issued restraining the respondents from taking any steps under the amended Act on June 27, 1968.
be preserved as one companypact block cultivated by the State owned farming companyporation.
The companypany hold large areas of land in Ahmednagar district for the cultivation of sugarcane for its factories.
Ninth Schedule,.
The said Corporation was incorporated on March 6, 1963 under the Companies Act and is owned and companytrolled by the State of Maharashtra respondent No.
As a result of the amending Act section 28 IA was inserted in the princiPal Act.
1 passed an order declaring 2677 acres 16 gunthas of appellant companys land situated in Lakshmiwadi to be in excess of the ceiling area.
The petition filed by the, appellants challenging the validity of the principal Act was in view of the Seventeenth Amendment dismissed by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court on March 10, 1965.
Thus a total area of 12146 arres 1/2 guntha was declared to be surplus.
It also empowered the State Government to make a scheme for the interim period.
2 declared an area of 8468 acres 261/2 gunthas in village Sakarwadi held by the appellant companypany to be in excess of the ceiling area.
From the judgment and order dated the 3/5/8 4 74 of the Bombay High Court in S.C.A. 1271/68.
On March 1, 1963 Special Deputy Collector respondent No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The injunction was thereafter vacated in respect of 10315 acres of land.
A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court as per judgment dated October 25, 1963 delivered in a petition filed by another party upheld the companystitutional validity of all the provisions of the principal Act, except section 28 which was struck down,.
It was held that the provisions of the Act other than section 28 were a measure of agrarian reform and as such protected by article 31A of the Constitution.
On March 7, 1963 Special Deputy Collector respondent No.
The appellants some others also filed petitions challenging the companystitutional validity of the principal Act.
K. Sen M. C. Bhandare, D. M. Popat, S. I. Thakore, P. H. Parekh and Sunanda Bhandare, for the appellant.
On June 20, 1964 the Constitution Seventeenth Amendment Act was passed.
Section 28 was held to be violative of article 14 of the Constitution.
Appeals against the aforesaid orders were filed by the appellant companypany to the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal.
1426 of 1974.
N. Shroff, and J. C. Bhatt, for respondent No.
