STATE OF ASSAM versus KA BRHYIEN KURKALANG & ORS.

Citation: [1972] 2 S.C.R. 506 · Decided: 23-11-1971 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.M. SIKRI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

506 
STATE OF ASSAM 
v. 
KA BRHYIEN KUR.KALANG & ORS. 
November 23, 1971 
[S. M. S!Klll, C.J., J. M. SmlLAT, I. D. DUA AND 
G. K. MITTER, JJ.] 
Constitution pf India, 1950, Sch. VJ, para 19-Scope of-Regulation 
by Governor before District Council for autonomous district was consti· 
luted-Whether Regulation effective thereafter. 
United J(hasi Jaintia Hills District (Application of Laws) Rcg:ilation 
5, 1952, s. 2(2)-Notification extending Act in Schedule to Regulation to 
autonomous district-Issued under Regulation after District Council was 
constituted-Effect. 
The administration of tribal areas in the State of Assam is governed, by 
virtue of Arts. 244 and 275 of the Constitution by the pro,isions con-
tained in Schedule VI of the Constitution. 
Paragraph 19 of the VI Sche-
dule contains transitional provisions, under which the administration 
of 
autonomous districts of the tribal areas specified in Part A of the Table lo 
the Schedule is vested in the Governor of the State urltil a District Council 
was constituted for the autonomous district. Under cl. 1 (b) of the para-
graph the Governor may make Regulations for the peace and good govern-
ment of any area and any Regulation so made may repeal or amend any 
Act of Parliament or of the State Legislature or any existing Jaw which is 
for the time being applicable to such area. 
The power conferred on the 
Governor is thus a legislative power without any limitations even in regard 
to matters in respect of which he can promulgate a Regulation. The only 
limitation is the requirement of the Presidential assent for the Regulatibn 
to have effect. [509 A-B, C-D; 510 G-H: 511 A:Dl 
For the autonomous district of the United Khasi Jaintia Hills a District 
Councii'was constituted in June 1952. But before that date, the Goyernor 
promulgated the United Khasi Jaintia Hills District (Applications of Laws) 
Regulation of 1952 for which the Presidential assent was obtained in May 
1952. The Jaws made applicable are set out in the schedule to the Regu-
lation. Section 2(2) of the Regulation empowered the Governor to direct 
by notification in the official gazette that any of the Jaws set out in the 
schedule to the Regulation shall extend to and have effect in so much area 
of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District or part thereof, and for that 
purpose, different areas and different dates may be specified for different 
laws. [508 A, C; 511 G; 513 P-BJ 
On September 8, 1961, the Governor by notification extended. thereby 
the Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act, 1910, which was one of the 
Jaws in the schedule to the Regulation, to the United Khasi Jaintia HiHs 
District. 
The authority under tm Act refui:ed renewal of a permit autho-
rising the respondents to distil liquor. The respondents thereupon chal-
lenged the validity of the Regulation as well as the notification issued there-
under and the High Court held that once a District Council was set up the 
Governor could not exercise power under para 19, that any Regulation 
made thereunder could remain effective until that period only, and that 
therefore, the notification issued in September 1961 extending the Excise 
Act had no effect. 
Allowing the appeal to this Court, 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
ASSAM v. KURKALANG (She/at, I.) 
SOT 
HELD : 
( 1) The Regulatioo,, was a competent legislation made 
in1 
pursuance of the power conferred by pa'ra t9(1)(b) of the VI Sch.edule 
to the Constitution and under that power the Governor could not only 
make l!-egulations .in the form of substantive laws but also could apply 
existing ·statuies; The words· 'until a District Council is so constituted lor 
an autonomous district' in the paragraph Only place a limit to the period. 
until which the power is exercisable and not any limitation on the extent 
of the power or the period 
during which a 
Regulation made by the 
Governor would be in force once it is validly made. Like any other 
J!iece of. leps_lati'!n, the Regulation continues to operate and. ~in elfec-
t1ve unttl 1t 1s either ·annulled or repeated under some 1"'gistahve power •. 
[512 A-D; 513 B-C] 
Ram Kirpal v, Bihar, [1970] 3 S.C.R. 233, followed. 
J, K. Gat J>/atit Mc.·nufacturing Co. Ltd. v. 
King Emperor, (1947} 
F.C.R» 141, rehtred to. 
(2) The effect of the Regulation was that the competent legislative 
authority, namely the Governor, selected certain laws enumerated in the 
schedule for their being applied to the district;· and it left it to the Go
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.