LexSASANKA SEKHAR MAITY & ORS. ETC. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
.. ..
•
"
•
•
SASANKA SEKHAR MAITY & ORS. ETC.
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
May 9, 1980
[Y. V. CHANDRACHUD, CJ., P. N· BHAGWATI, V. R. KRISHNA IYER,
V. D. TULZAPURKAR AND A. P. SEN; JJ.]
Fixation of ceiling of agricultural holdings-Whether the provisions of Chapter
JIB of the West Bengal Land &forms Act, 1955 (Act X of 1956) inserted by
the West Bengal Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1971 (President's Act TJI of
1971) and replaced by the West Bengal Land Reforms (Amendment)
Act,
1972 (Act XII of 1972) with retrospective effect from February 15, 1971 is viola-
tive of the second proviso to Article 31A(1) of the Constitution.
In furtherance of the Direc(ive Principles enshrined in Article 39(b), agra-
rian reforn1 wa~ undertaken in the State of West Bengal in two stages. The -first
was the stage of abolition of the zamindari system. The West Bengal Estates
Acquisition Act, 1953 (Act I of !954)
which received the assent of the
President on ·February 12, 1954 has been placed in the Ninth Schedule as
item No. 59, woas an Act to provide for the acquisition of estates of
rights of intefmediaries
therein
and
of certain
rights of
raiyats and
under-raiyats.
By vfrtue of notification under s. 4 issued on .f\pril 14, 1955
declaring April 15., 1955 to be the date of vesting the estates and the rights
of intermediaries therein, vested in the State free from all encumbrances
from that date·.
After the· extinction of the feudal system of zamindari, the
big landlords became interni.ediaries, but by virtue of s. 6(1)(a), {cl, (dl,
(e) and (f), they were entitled to retain land comprised in homesteads, non-
agricultural land in their khas possession not exceeding 15 acres, agricultural
lands in their khas possession not exceeding 25 acres, tank fisheries and land
comprised in tea gardens or orchards or land used
for the
purpose of
livestock breeding, poultry farming or dairy.
Under s. 6(2) they became
tenants of the State. The stage was thus set for the imposition of the ceiling
on agricultural holdings.
The West Bengal Land Reform.< Act, 1955 (Act X of 1956) caine into
force on March 31, 1956.
The object and purpose of the Al:! as retlected in
the preamble was to reform the law relating to land tenure consequent on the
vesting of all estates and of ce.rtain rights therein in the State. This v1as fol-
lowed by notification issued by the State Government under s. 49 of the West
Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953 on April 9, 1956. As a result of the
notification under s. 49 the petitioners, who were raiyats, were deemed to be
intermediaries and the lands owned and possessed by them as estates and all
the lands and the petitioner's rights in such lands vested in the State with
effect from April 10, 1956. But the petitioner as intermediaries were permit-
ted to retain the lands as provided for in s. 6 (1).
This state of affairs continued till February 12, 1971 when the West Bengal
Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1971 (President's Act ill of 1971) caine
into force. This was replaced in due coorsb, by the West Bengal Land Reforms
(Amendment) Ac~ 1972 (Act XII of 1972) with retrospective effect from
February 12, 1971. These Acts brought about a drastic change by introducing
chapter IIB for the imposition of a ceiling an agricultural holdingi;.
As a
necessary consequence the Acts deleted s. 4(3) as "'ell as s. 6.
As a
18-610 SCT/80
1209
A
B
c
D
E
\•
F
G
B
' '
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
1210
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1980] 3 S.C.R.
result of the deletion of s. 4(3), the right of retention of raiyats of agri-
cultural lands to the extent of 25 acres was taken away and the deletion of
s. 6(2) relieved the State of thi!· obligation to pay n1arket vaJue for acquisition
of the surplus land.
West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (Act X of 1956) and the West
Bengal Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1972 (Act XII of 1972), which
introduced Chapter' IIB therein with retrospective effect fro111 February 12,
1971, have both been placed in the Ninth Schedule by the Constitution
(Thirtyfourth Amendment) Act, 1974 being items 60 and 81 thereof.
They
have thus the immunity of Article 3 IB besides being fully protected under
Articles 31A and 31C.
The petitioners being aggrieved by these .agrarian reform challenged in these
writ petitions the validity of definition of the term 'family' contained ins. 14K(c), JI.
the fixation of ceiling limits of a raiyat under s. 14M(l), the provision for ,Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.