LexVISHWESHA THIRTHA SWAMIAR & ORS versus STATE OF MYSORE AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
., A B VISHWESHA THIRTHA SWAMIAR!& ORS v. STATE OF MYSORE AND ANR. August 12, 1971. 137 [S.M. SIKRI, C. J., A.N. RAY AND D.G. PALEKAR, JJ.,] Mysore Land Revenue (Surcharge) Act, 1961 as amended-Com- petence of State Legislature to lei·y-Surcharge on land rerenae- Whether the Acts discriminatory and therefore violatil'e of Art. 14 o/" the Constitution. In 1961, the new State of Mysore enacted Mysore Land Revenue C (Surcharge) Act, 1961, by which a surcharge on the Land Re1·enoc @15 n.p. on every rupee of land revenue was levied and this was pay- able by every landholder liable to pay a sum exceeding Rs. 20 as land revenue. By another enactment Mysore Land Revenue (Surcharge) Amendment Act, 1962, the surcharge for 1962-63 and 1963-64 was raised to 100 per cent of the land revenue in the case of wet and garJcn lands and 75 % in respect of dry lands. D E F Both these Acts were challenged before the High Court on severa 1 grounds but the High Court rejected them and dismissed the petitions. In appeal, before this Court it was contended (i) that the Mvsore Legislature was not competent to enact the Mysore Act of 196i and the amending Act and (ii) that since there is inequality in taxation between lands comprised in South Kanara District and the areas in the erstwhile Mysore State, the levy is hit by Art 14 as being discriminatory in character and therefore bad in law. Dismissing the appeal, HELD: (i) Surcharge fell squarely under Entry 45 of List II and it is not a tax on land revenue but an enhancement of land rel'enue by way of surcharge and even if it is raised by J 00 % does not change the nature of the imposition. It is still land reven,ue and the Mysore Legislature is competent to enact the impugned Acts. [140 D-E] (ii) In view of the temporary nature of. the Acts imposing additional land revenue, while resettlement and survey was being done in the entire State in order to have a uniform land revenue law, the Acts in question are not violative of Art 14 of the Constitution. [144F] C. V. Rajagopalachariar v. State of Madras, A.I.R. J 960 Mad. G 543, State of Andhra Pradesh v. Na/la Raja Reddy [1967] 3 S. C. R. 28 and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Bhopal Sugar Industries Ltd.[1964]6 S.C.R. 846, referred to. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 2222 of 1966, 441 to 444 and 446 of 1970. H Appeal from the judgment and o_rder ~ated .s.eptember 17 1965 of the Mysore High Court m Wnt Petlt10ns Nos. 1173, 1138, 1151, 1152, 1153 and 1155of1963. 138 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1972] l S.C .. R. V. S. Desai and R. B. Datar, for the appellants (in A all the appeals). R. Gopalakrishnan and M. Veerappa, for the respondents (in all the appeals). The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Sikri, C. J.-Seven writ petitions were filed in the Mysore High Court under art. 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the Mysore Land Revenue (Surcharge) Act, 1961-Mysore Act XIII of 1961-, B as (}mended by Mysore Acts 1 and 31 of 1963, as being ultra rires the Constitution. Some of the petitioners were c from South Kanara District, and some from Bellary Dis- trict. which were part of the Madras State prior to the re- organisation of States. Some petitioners were from the Karnatak area of the then Bombay State. The High Court held that the Acts were within the competence of the Mysore legislature and did not violate Arts. 14, 19 D or 3'1 of the Constitution. There are six appeals before us but the learned counsel for, the appellant gave us facts relating to writ petition arising from South Kanara district only. It is common ground that if the High Court judgment on the writ E petition arising from South Kanara district is upheld, the other appeals must also fail. In writ petition No. 1137 of 1963, which is concerned with lands in South Kanara district, the facts in brief are these. The petitioner mutt, which is appellant before F us, owned immovable properties in the district of South Kanara and was paying an assessment to the Government approximately of about Rs. 8,000/- per annum. In respect of these lands survey and settlement were intro- duced from 1902 to 1904 and classified into three major classes of lands, riz., dry, wet and garden. The settle- G ment was for a period of 30 years and the wet lands were further classified into sub-classes. Under the terms of the Ryotwari settlement governing the district the revenue assessm
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.