Judgement

S. R. Das, J. -

This judgment disposes of civil Appeals Nos. 62 of 1953 and 63 of 1953 which have been heard together.

2. The Motipur Zamindari Company Ltd., the appellant in Civil Appeal No. 62 of 1953, was incorporated in 1932 under the Companies Act and has its registered office in Bengal. It supplies sugar-cane to a sister concern named Motipur Sugar Factory Ltd. Raja Jankinath Roy and Narendra Nath Roy and Co., Ltd., the appellant in C. A. No. 63 of 1953, was incorporated in 1933 under the Indian Companies Act and also has its registered office in Bengal. This company owns Zamindari properties in Purnea in the State of Bihar as well as in Malda in the State of West Bengal. It carries on business amongst others, as banker and financier.

3. On 30-12-1949 a bill entitled the Bihar Land Reforms Bill was passed by the Bihar Legislature and having been reserved for the consideration of the President received his assent on 11-9-1950. The Act so passed and assented to was published in the Bihar Gazette on 25-9-1950 and was brought into force on the same day by a notification made by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred on it by S. 1 (3) of the Act. Many of the proprietors and tenure-holders of Zamindari Estates took proceedings against the State of Bihar for appropriate orders restraining the State Government from taking over the estates under the provisions of the Act which they claimed to be beyond the legislative competency of the Bihar Legislature and otherwise void. On 12-3-1951 a Special Bench of the Patna High Court held that the Act was unconstitutional on account of its contravention of Art. 14 of the Constitution. The State of Bihar appealed to this Court. Pending that appeal, the provisional Parliament passed the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951. The respondents in the main appeal took proceedings in this Court contending that the Act amending the Constitution was invalid. This Court, however, on 5-10-1951, upheld the validity of the amending Act. On 6-11-1951 notifications were issued under S. 3 of the Bihar Act declaring that certain Touzies belonging to the appellants specified in the notification had passed to and become vested in the State. Both the appellants made separate applications to the Patna High Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution praying for mandamus or suitable direction of order restraining the respondent from taking possession of their respective estate or tenures by virtue of the said notifications and for other ancillary reliefs. The appeals filed by the State of Bihar against the order of the Special Bench declaring the "Act to be void came up for hearing before this Court and this Courts upheld the validity of the Act, except as to a few provision mentioned in the majority judgment which were held to be severable. Thereafter, the two applications made by, the two appellants under Art. 226 before the Patna High Court came up for bearing and were dismissed by a Bench of that Court on 22-12-1952. The present appeals have been filed with leave of the Patna High Court against the said dismissal.

4. The question raised before the High Court was whether the Act was, on its true construction, intended to apply to zamindari estates of companies incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. In support of the appellants contention that it was not, it was urged that the Bihar Legislature had no authority to legislate with respect to trading corporations or non-trading corporations whose objects were not confined to one State. Reference was made to entries 43, 44 and 45 of List 1 to show that it was Parliament alone which was authorised to make law with respect to matters set forth in those entries. The contention was that the Bihar Legislature in enacting the Act invaded the Union field and so the Act was invalid. This argument was sought to be reinforced by reference to the provisions of the Act and the winding up provisions of the Companies Act. The Patna High Court overr