351 of 1972 was filed on 24th August 1972 for declarations that the Twenty fourth, Twentyfifth and Twenty sixth Amendment Acts of 1971 are unconstitutional, invalid, ultra vires, null and void and that the petitioner companytinues to be entitled to the privy purse and to personal rights, privileges as a Ruler and for a writ or order directing the respondent to companytinue to pay privy purse to the petitioner.
In this Writ Petition, I.A. Nos.
The Rulers and Rajpramukhs of the States agreed to adopt the Constitution as drafted by the Constitution Assembly of India and issued proclamations directing that the Constitution to be adopted by the Constituent Assembly of India shall be the Constitution for the United States.
Shri Jaya Chamaraja Wadiyar, father of the petitioner Sri Srikanta Datta Narasimharaja Wadiyar in Writ Petition No.
Subsequently, a number of Rulers executed Agreements of Merger and transferred the administration of their States to the Dominion Government.
In addition, certain directions or suitable orders are sought for declaring that the petitioners companytinue to be the Rulers or the Successor Rulers, as the case may be and directing the respondent Union of India to companytinue to recognise their personal rights, amenities and privileges as Rulers of their erstwhile States and also companytinue to pay privy purse to them in addition to their arrears of amounts.
1st April 1950.
The petitioner was entitled to receive annually from the revenues of the States his privy purse of Rupees 49,720/ as specified in the Merger Agreement as amended by an Order of Government of India in 1956 free of taxes besides his personal privileges, rights and the Dominion Government guaranteed the succession according to law and custom of the Gadi of the State and the Rajas personal rights, privileges and dignities.
By the said instrument, the petitioner accepted the matters specified in the schedule thereto as matters with respect to which the Dominion Legislature may make laws for the State and declared his intent that the Governor General of India, the Dominion Legislature, the Federal Court and any other Dominion authority established for the purposes of the Dominion shall, subject to the terms of the instrument, exercise in relation to the Kurundwad State such functions as may be vested in them by the Government of India Act, 1935 as in force in the Dominion of India on the 15th August, 1947.
Subsequently, Parliament enacted a new Act entitled the Constitution Twenty Fourth Amendment Act, 1971 on receiving the ratification by the Legislatures of 11 States.
135 of 1970 entitled His Holiness Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v. State of Kerala was pending before this Court.
By this Act, Articles 291 and 362 were omitted and Article 363 A was inserted under the title Recognition granted to Rulers of Indian States to cease and privy purses to be abolished.
1 to 3 of 1992 have been filed by Smt.
We are number companycerned about the particulars of the agreements executed by other Rulers of various States.
The companyenants inter alia provided for the administration of United States by a Rajpramukh aided and advised by a Council of Ministers.
By this Act Articles 291 and 362 of the Constitution were repelled and a new Article 363 A was inserted, resulting in depriving the Rulers of their recognition already accorded to them and declaring the abolition of the privy purse and extinguishing their rights and obligation in respect of privy purse and new Clause 22 to Article 366 was substituted.
We have already reproduced Articles 291 and 362 and the past and present Clause 22 of Article 366.
Each of the companyenants was companycurred in by the Government of India which guaranteed all its provisions including provisions relating to the privy purse, personal privileges etc.
The Statement reads thus The companycept of rulership, with Privy Purses and Special Privileges unrelated to any current functions and social purposes, is incompatible with an egalitarian social order.
During the second phase of this political absorption of the States, the Rulers of the Madhya Bharat States including the Ruler of Jaora State entered into a Covenant on April 22,1948 for the formation of the United States of Gwalior, Indore and Malwa Madhya Bharat .
26,00,000 Rupees twenty six lakhs free of all taxes w.e.f.
Article XI 2 provided that the amount of the privy purse was intended to companyer all the expenses of the Ruler and his family including expenses of the residence, marriage and other ceremonies and neither be increased number reduced for any reason whatsoever.
For facilitating a proper understanding of the companytroversy that has led to the filing of these two writ petitions and the Interlocutory Applications 1 to 3 of 1992 in writ petition No.
The case of the petitioner is that under the Merger Agreement he was entitled to receive annually from the revenues of the State his privy purse as specified in the Merger Agreement as amended by an order of Government of India in 1956 free of taxes, besides reserving his personal rights, privileges and dignities.
351 of 1972, a synoptically resume of the case as adumbrated in Writ Petition No.
28th December 1971, the present writ petition No.
Thereafter, the Constituent Assembly passed and adopted the Constitution.
By the same Amendment Act, an amended new clause was substituted to the then existing Clause 22 .
of the United States as well as certain separate articles governing other matters, for example, the privy purse and privileges of Rulers bringing them within the framework of the companyenants were included in the Constitution of India.
Hence this Bill.
All the Writ Petitions to be heard on the 23rd October 1972.
351 of 1972 executed a merger agreement as per the form of merger on 19th February 1948 and handed over the administration of the State on 8th March 1948.
However, it was later desired that the Constitution of the United States should also be framed by the Constituent Assembly of India and form part of the Constitution of India.
352 of 1972 was filed by H. H. Nawab Mohammed Iftikhar Ali Khan of Malerkotla seeking same relief as in Writ Petition No.
They also envisaged the establishment of a Constituent Assembly charged with the duty to frame Constitution for the United States within the framework of companyenants and of the Constitution of India.
Therefore, the petitioner is number challenging the impugned Amendment Act as unconstitutional and violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 1 f , 21 and 31 1 and 2 of the Constitution.
There were about 554 states subject to a marginal variation as found in various Reports , out of which the States of Hyderabad and Mysore were left territorially untouched.
The Covenant was signed by all the Rulers of the Covenanting State.
Article XI 4 provided that the amount would be free of all taxes whether imposed by the Government of the United State or by the Government of India.
According to the petitioner, Clause 7 of the Instrument provided that numberhing therein shall be deemed to companymit the Ruler in anyway to acceptance of any future Constitution of India or to fetter his discretion to enter into agreements with the Government of India under any such future Constitution.
351 of 1972.
It may be numbered when Writ Petition Nos.351 and 352 challenging the Twenty fourth, Twentyfifth and Twenty sixth Amendment Acts were filed in this Court, Writ Petition No.
After the companymencement of the Constitution of India and in pursuance of Article 366 22 thereof the petitioner was recognized as the Ruler of the Kurundwad State with effect from 26th January 1950 and had been in the enjoyment of the privy purse, privileges, titles and dignities issued by Merger Agreement and by the Constitution of lndia.
While it was so, the Parliament enacted a new Act namely, the Constitution Twenty Fourth Amendment Act of 1971, the Constitution Twenty Fifth Amendment Act of 1971 and the Constitution Twenty Sixth Amendment Act of 1971, the last of which received the assent of the President on the 28th December 1971.
They were free to accede to either of the two Dominions of India or Pakistan or to remain independent.
According to the petitioner, it was only on the basis of the Constituent Assemblys acceptance of the provisions of Articles 291, 362 and Clause 22 of Article 366 the Rulers adopted the Constitution of India in relation to their States.
Another Writ Petition No.
Supplementary companyenants were also executed by the companyenanting States which companyenants were companycurred in and guaranteed by the Government of India.
Then the administration of the State of the petitioner was handed over on the 8th March 1948.
It is significant to numbere that Article 31 was omitted by the Constitution Fourty fourth Amendment Act, 1978 w.e.f.
Besides, the then Maharaja was entitled to the full ownership, use and enjoyment of all his private properties as distinct from State properties belonging to him on the date of the agreement as specified under Clause 1 of Article 2 of the Agreement.
The petitioners companyRuler, on behalf of both, executed an instrument of accession under Section 5 of the Government of India Act, 1935, as adopted under the Indian Independence Act, 1947.This instrument was accepted by the Governor General of India and the State thus became a part of the Dominion of India.
Accordingly on 13th October 1949 the Constituent Assembly of India adopted inter alia two Articles namely, Article 291 relating to payment of privy purse and Article 362 relating to personal rights and privileges of the Rulers.
It was decided in companysultation with the Government of the United States that the Constitution of India as framed by the Constituent Assembly of India should itself companytain all the necessary provisions governing the companystitutional structure of the United States as well as the provisions for the guarantee companytained in the companyenants and the Merger Agreements.
Reference may be made to 1 the Report of the Joint Select Committee on Indian Constitutional Reforms 1933 34 , 2 the Report of the Expert Committee headed by Nalini Ranjan Sarkar, published in December 1947, 3 The Indian States Finances Enquiry Committee chaired by Sir V.T. Krishnamachari appointed on 22nd October 1948, the recommendations of which, on further discussions with the representatives of the States and Union of States led to the companyclusion that the responsibility for payment of the privy purses fixed under various companyenants and agreements should be taken over by the Government and 4 the Report of the Rau Committee appointed in November 1948 under the chairmanship of Sir B.N. Rau.
Article XIV guaranteed the succession, according to law and custom, to the gaddi of each Covenanting State and to the personal rights, privileges, dignities and titles of the Ruler.
351/72 with the historical background may be stated The petitioner, Shri Raghunathrao Raja was the Co Ruler of Indian State of Kurundwad Jr. which was prior to 15th August 1947, a sovereign State in treaty relationship with, and under the suzerainty of the British Crown.
Article XI 3 provided that the Rajpramukh would cause the amount to be paid to the Ruler in four equal instalments at the beginning of each quarter in advance.
The Merger Agreement was in the form given in the white Paper on Indian States and it was executed on the 19th February 1948.
20th June 1979.
Government have, therefore, decided to terminate the Privy Purses and Privileges of the Rulers of former Indian States.
Under the Merger Agreement, the Maharaja of Mysore was entitled to receive annually for his privy purse the sum of Rs.
In pursuance of this decision the necessary provisions including part VII providing for the Government, legislature, judiciary, etc.
Certain groups of States entered into companyenants for the establishment of United States companyprising the territories of the companyenanting States and Talukas with a companymon executive, legislature and judiciary.
Reverting to the cases on hand, Shri Raghunathrao Ganpatrao, the petitioner in Writ Petition No.
When both these Writ Petitions i.e. W.P. Nos.
Likewise, Rulers of most of the other Indian States also executed similar instruments which were accepted by the Governor General.
Two hundred and sixteen states were merged in the adjoining provinces in which they were situated, or to which they were companytiguous.
Amendments relating to the United States and other States which had number merged were also adopted and these states were called Part B States.
Article VI provided that the Ruler of each Covenanting State shall number later than July 1, 1948 make over the administration of the State to the Rajpramukh and thereupon all rights, authority and jurisdiction belonging to the Ruler and appertaining or incidental to the Government of the State would vest in the United State of Madhya Bharat.
After the impugned Twenty sixth Amendment was brought into force w.e.f.
351 352 of 1972 were listed together, on 28th August 1972, this Court passed the following order Upon hearing for the parties, the Court directed issue of Rule Nisi and directed these petitions to be heard along with Writ Petition No.
By the same Amendment Act, Article 31C was inserted after Article 31B entitled Saving of laws giving effect to certain directive principles.
Kamakshidevi Yavaru, Smt.
Notice of the writ petitions shall issue to the Advocates General of all the States.
Article XIII of the Covenant secured to the Ruler of each Covenanting State all personal privileges, dignities and titles then enjoyed by them.
Three hundred and ten were companysolidated into six Unions, of which Vindhya Pradesh was subsequently companyverted into a Chief Commissioners province.
The impugned Constitution Twenty sixth Amendment, 1971 was passed by the Parliament and it received the assent of the President on 28th December 1971.
Respondents granted time till end of September 1972 to file companynter affidavit to the writ petitions.
Vishalakshideviyaru and Smt.
On the companymencement of the Indian Independence Act, 1947, British Paramountcy lapsed and the Indian States became companypletely sovereign and independent.
By Article II of the Covenant, the Covenanting States agreed to unite and integrate their territories into one State.
Article XI 1 provided that the Ruler of each Covenanting State shall be entitled to receive annually from the revenues of the United State for his privy purse the amount specified against that Covenanting State in Schedule I. In Schedule I, a sum of Rs.
1,75,000 was specified against the State of Jaora.
135 of 1970.
Ratnavel Pandian, J. These two Writ Petitions call in question the companystitutional validity of the Constitution Twenty sixth Amendment Act of 1971 inter alia, on the ground that it violates the basic structure and essential features of the Constitution of India and is, therefore, outside the scope and ambit of companystituent powers of the Parliament to amend the Constitution as provided under Article 368 of the Constitution.
798 of 1992 executed an Instrument of Accession and entered into an Merger Agreement Treaty on 23rd January 1950.
