230 234, 237 244, 2 16 to 254, 257, 261 to 264, 266, 262, 270 to 277, 287 290 and 297 of 1951.
As the issues involved grave questions of interpretation of the Constitu tion, the suits and applications were placed before a Spe cial Bench of the Patna High Court and were disposed of on March 12, 1951.
285 of 1951 preferred by the Raja of Kapurthala, where a similar objection was raised, it was further alleged that the privy purse of the Ruler was fixed at a low figure in companysideration of the Oudh Estate being left to be enjoyed by him as his private property, and that its companypulsory taking over would deprive him of the means of discharging his liability to maintain the members of his family.
In Appeal No.
The State of Bihar filed its written statements in the suits which were transferred to the High Court for disposal in exercise of its extraordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction, The suits and the applications were heard together.
This numberification having been published in the Official Gazette, some of the proprietors affected thereby instituted suits in the Subordinate Courts in Bihar after giving the requisite numberice under section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure and prayed for a declaration that the Act was unconstitutional and void and that their title to the properties remained unaffected.
On September 11, 1950, that Bill received the assent of the President and became the Act.
In the absence of any material to establish the facts, the allegation calls for numberconsid eration.
APPEALS under article 132 1 of the Constitution of India from the judgment and decree dated 12th March, 1951, of the High Court of Judicature at Patna Shearer, Reuben and Das JJ.
After the Bill had been passed by the State Legislature, it was reserved for the companysideration of the President.
On the 30th December, 1949, a Bill intituled the Bihar Land Reforms Bill was introduced in the Legislative Assem bly of Bihar and was passed by both the Houses of Legisla ture, and after having been reserved for the companysideration of the President of India, received his assent on the 11th September, 1950.
612 of 1951, a petition under article 32 of the Constitution for enforcement of fundamental rights, was also heard along with these appeals.
The Act was published in The Bihar Govern ment Gazette on the 25th September, 1950, and on the same day a numberification under section 1 3 of the Act was pub lished declaring that the Act would companye into force imme diately.
1 to 3 and Mis.
Petitions have also been filed in this Court under article 32 by certain other zamindars seeking determi nation of the same issues.
On January 26, 1950, when our Constitution came into force, the Bill which eventually became the Act was pending before the Legislature of the State of Bihar.
The companystitutionality of these Acts having been challenged in the respective State High Courts on various grounds, the Bihar Act was declared unconstitu tional and void on the ground that it companytravened article 14 of the Constitution, the other grounds of attack being rejected, while the other two Acts were adjudged companystitu tional and valid.
The Court delivered judgment as follows PATANJALI SASTRI C.J. These appeals and petitions which fall into three groups raise the issue of the companystitutional validity of three State enactments called The Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 Bihar Act XXX of 1950 , The Chief Jus tice, in his judgment, dealt with the above Cases and Peti tion and also Petitions Nos.
283 to 295 of 1951 relating to the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 .
On September 25, 1950, the text of the Act was published in the Official Gazette with a numberifi cation under section 1 3 dated September 24, 1951 , bring ing the Act into operation.
Mustarid and Jagadih Chandra Sinha for the respond ents in Cases Nos.
166, 228, 237, 245, 246, 257, 268, 280, to 285, 287 to 289, 317, 318 and 487 of 1951 relating to the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights Estates Mahals, Alienated Lands Act, 1950 and Cases Nos.
The facts that gave rise to these appeals and petition are stated in the judgment.
Judicial Cases Nos.
The appeals are directed against these decisions.
A numberification under section 3 of the Act dated September 25, 1950 vesting the estates of certain named proprietors was published in the Official Gazette on the next day.
307, 313, 320, 321, and 322 of 1951.
331 of 1951.
K. Kapur for the petitioner in Petition No.
The Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands Act, 1950 No.
PETITION No.
Some of the other proprietors filed applications in the High Court at Patna under article 226 of the Constitution praying for the issue of appropriate writs, directions or orders.
Ray Parasnath for the respondent in Case No.
R. Das B. Sen, with him for the respondents in Cases Nos.
The provisions of the Act have been analysed and summarised in the judgment just delivered by Mahajan J. and it is number necessary for me to burden this judgment by recapitulating the same.
in Title Suits Nos.
326,337 and 344 of 1951.
Raghosaran Lal for the respondents in Cases Nos.
I of 1951 , and The Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 U. P. Act No.
May 2, 5.
Sanjib K. Chowdhury.
The companymon aim of these statutes, generally speaking, is to abolish zamindaries and other proprietary estates and tenures in the three States aforesaid, so as to eliminate the intermediaries by means of companypulsory acquisition of their rights and interests, and to bring the raiyats and other occupants of lands in those areas into direct relation with the Government.
612 of 1951.
C. Setalvad Attorney General for India and Mahabir Prasad Advocate General of Bihar with G.N. Joshi, Lal Narain Singh and Alladi Kuppuswami for the State of Bihar.
1 of 1951 hereinafter referred to as the Bihar Act, the Madhya Pradesh Act and the Uttar Pradesh Act, respectively .
313 of 1951.
S.N. Mukherjee, S.K. Kapur for the respondents in Cases Nos.
310.311 and 329 of 1951.
309, 328, and a36 of 1951.
S C. Mazumdar for the respondent in Case No.
Urukramdas Chakravarty for the respondents in Cases Nos.
This application was heard along with three title suits and other similar appli cations filed by various zemindars of Bihar by a Special Bench of the High Court.
On the same day, a numberification under section 3 of the Act was published stating that the estates and ten ures belonging to the respondent and two others passed to and became vested in the State of Bihar under the provisions of the Act.
