BANSIDHAR AND OTHERS versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS

Citation: [1989] 2 S.C.R. 152 · Decided: 29-03-1989 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.S. PATHAK · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 4 judgment(s) · cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
BANSIDHAR AND OTHERS 
v. 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS 
MARCH 29, 1989 
[R.S. PATHAK, CJ, E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, 
RANGANATH MISRA, M.H. KANIA AND 
-t 
M.N. VENKATACHALIAH, JJ.] 
• 
Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955: Chapter IIl-B and ss. 5(6A) and 
30 £-Ceiling area-Determination of-Effect of repeal of-Proceed-
ings with reference to appointed date under the Act-Whether can be 
initiated and continued under the repealed provisions, even after coming 
into effect of Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings ·--t 
Act, 1973-State's right to excess land and land-owner's liability to 
surrender surplus land, on the appointed day-Whether a right accrued 
and liability incurred within_ the meaning of clause (c) and (e) of s. 6 of 
Rajasthan General Clauses Act-Whether affected by repeal-Sec. 6 of 
Rajasthan General Clauses Act-Whether attracted-Whether s. 3 of 
1973 Act has overriding effect as to exclude operation of the 1955 Act. 
Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 
1973: Sections 3, 4(1), 15(2) and 40( ])-Ceiling area-Determination 
y 
E 
of-Repeal of Chapter lll-B and s. 5(6A) of the Rajasthan Tenancy 
Act, 1955-Effect of-Whether cases as on notified date should be 
decided under old law-Whether rights accrued and liabilities _incurred 
under the old law affected-Whether new law has overriding effect over 
the old one. 
F 
G 
H 
General Clauses Act, 1897/Rajasthan General Clauses Act, 
1955: Section 6-Applicability of-In absence of express reference to the 
section or of express provisions to similar effect in the repealing Act-
Repeal and re-enactment on the same subject-Rights accrued and 
liabilities incurred under repealed law-Whether effaced. 
Statutory Construction: Repeal and Saving-Rights and obliga-
tions saved in repealing statute-Whether exhaustive. 
-f 
Chapter III-B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 prescribing a 
ceiling on holdings of agricultural lands, and cl.(6A) of s. 5, defining 
'ceiling area' were introduced into the Act by the Rajasthan Tenancy 
(Amendment) Act, 1960. The notified date under the 1955 Act was 
152 
-
-
+· 
, 
BANSIDHAR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN 
153 
1.4.1966. Subsequently, on 1.1.1973, by the Rajasthan Imposition of 
Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Ordinance, 1973, these provisions 
were repealed, except to the extent indicated in the second proviso to s. 
4(1) and s. 15(2) of the Ordinance. Certain transfers made hy the land-
holders, even during the operation of the.old law, were recognised as 
valid transfers for the purpose of computation of ceiling area under the 
new dispensation brought about by the Ordinance. The Ordinance was 
replaced by the 1973 Act with retrospective effect from 1.1.1973. Sec-
tion 40 of the Act repealed both the old law in Chapter III-B of the 1955 
Act and the earlier Ordinance. 
After the 1973 Act came into force on l. l.1973 cases for determi-
nation of 'ceiling-areas' under Chapter 111-B of the 1955 Act came to be 
initiated and were sought to he continued under the repealed Chapter 
111-B against the appellants including the appellants in C.A. No. 
1003(N) of 1977 who claimed to have entered into possession and culti-
vation of certain parcels of land, pursuant to agreements to sell dated 
28.4.1957, said to have been executed, in their favour hy the then land 
holder. The sale deeds in this case were passed on 22.8.1966, after the 
notified date. Proceedings for the fixation of ceiling area in the hands of 
the then land-holder were commenced under the repealed Chapter 111-
B of the 1955 Act, and the purchases in question were held to be hit bys . 
.,.. 
30DD of the repealed Chapter 111-B, as appellants did not possess the 
residential qualifications, prescribed by the section for the eligibility for 
recognition of such transfers. 
\ ... 
The appellants approached the High Court, contending that after 
the coming into force of the 1973 Act which by s. 40, repealed Chapter 
111-B of the 1955 Act, recourse could not be had to the repealed law for 
purposes of commencement, conduct and conclusion of any proceedings 
for fixation of ceiling as prescribed under the old law. 
Rejecting the contention of the appellants, the High Court held 
that the new Act of 1973 did not have the sweeping effect of destroying 
all the rights accrued and liabilities incurred under the old Act. 
The correctness of the view of the High Court, was challenged in 
the appeals before this Court. Some other writ petitions were al

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.