LexGLANROCK ESTATE (P) LTD. versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2010] 12 S.C.R. 597 GLANROCK ESTATE (P) LTD. V. STATE OF TAMIL NADU (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 242 of 1988) SEPTEMBER 9, 2010 [S.H. KAPADIA, CJI., K.S. PANICKER RADHAKRISHNAN AND SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.] Constitution of India, 1950: Articles 368, 14, 19, 21, 300A and Ninth Schedule rlw. A B c Article 31 B - Immunity to laws inserted in Ninth Schedule - Scope of - Constitutional validity of Janmam Act upheld in Balmadies case* except the provisions thereof which provided for acquisition of forest Land - Insertion of the Act 0 in the Ninth Schedule - Proceedings in respect of the land in question, under Janmam Act - Challenged - High Court upheld the proceedings - On appeal, matter referred to Constitution Bench of Supreme Court - The Constitution Bench in l.R. Coe/ho's case*** held that Article 31B was valid - Plea that insertion of the Act in the Ninth Schedule E abrogated the basic structure of the Constitution, namely, · judicial review, rule of law, separation of powers and principle of equality and hence not validated under Article 31 B - Held: Inclusion of Janmam Act in the Ninth Schedule by Thirty- -fourth constitutional amendment did not amount to violation F of doctrine of basic structure - The challenge to the thirty- fourth amendment is based on the right to property in the garb of over-arching principles like separation of powers, rule of law and abrogation of power of judicial review - Gudalur Janmam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1969. G Article 368 - Power to amend the Constitution - Nature and limitations of - Held: Power to amend the Constitution is a derivative power - Therefore, it is subject to two limitations 597 H 598 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010) 12 S.C.R. A i.e. doctrine of basic structure and lack of legislative competence -- The concepts like secularism, democracy, separation of powers, power of judicial review fall outside the scope of amendatory powers of Parliament under Article 368 - Doctrine of Basic Structure .. B Article 14 - It is only that breach of principle of equality which is of the character of destroying the basic framework of the Constitution, which will not be protected by Article 31 B and not every breach of principle of equality - In cases of violation of Article 14 distinction between constitutional law and ordinary C law is required to be kept in mind - Ordinary law can be challenged on the touchstone of Article 14 - Constitutional amendment violating any over-arching principle in the Constitution i.e. concepts like secularism, democracy. separation of powers, power of judicial review fall outside the D scope of amendatory powers of Parliament under Article 368 - If any of these were to be deleted, it would require changes to be made not only in Part Ill of the Constitution but also in Articles 245 and the three Lists of the Constitution resulting in the change of the very structure or framework of the E Constitution. Seventh Schedule, List Ill Entry 42 and List II Entry 18 - Article 31 (2) - Enactment of Guda/ur Janmam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1969 - Whether F the enactment liable to be struck down for lack of legislative competence - Held: The requirement of public purpose and compensation are not legislative requirements of the competence of Legislature to make laws under Entry 18 of List II or Entry 42 of List Ill, but are conditions and restrictions under Article 31 (2) - Thus, the Act received immunity from G Article 31 (2) with retrospective effect, when it was included in the Ninth Sche1du/e - In pith and substance, the Act was in respect of 'Land' and 'Land tenure" under Entry 18 of List II - Thus. the Act not liable to be struck down for lack of legislative competence -- Gudalur Janmam Estates (Abolition and H GLANROCK ESTATE (P) LTD. v. STATE OF TAMIL 599 NAOU Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1969. Gudalur Janmam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1969 - Applicability of the Act - The Act notified A in 1974 - Proceedings in respect of the land in question initiated under Ceiling Act, before the date of notification of 8 the Janmam Act - After the notification, proceedings initiated under Janmam Act in respect of the land in question - Held: Even if the proceedings had been initiated under the Ceiling Act, it was open to the State to act according to provisions of the Janmam Act - Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fi
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.