Judgment

BOSE, J. :

This is a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution. It raises an important question about the post-Constitutional rights to property situate in Indian States that were not part of British India before the Constitution but which acceded to the Dominion of India shortly before the Constitution and became an integral part of the Indian Republic after it.

2. The States in question here are Charkhari and Sarila. In British days they were independent States under the paramountcy of the British Crown. They acknowledged the British Crown as the surerain power and owed modified allegiance to it, but none to the Government of India.

3. In 1947 India obtained Independence and became a Dominion by reason of the Indian Independence Act of 1947. The suzerainty of the British Crown even the Indian States lapsed at the same time because of section 7 of that Act. Immediately after, all but three of the Indian States acceded to the new Dominion by executing Instruments of accession. Among them were the two States with which we are concerned. The new Dominion of India was empowered to accept these accessions by a suitable amendment in the government of India Act,1935. The sovereignty of the acceding States was expressly recognised and safeguarded. The operative words of the Instrument of Accession which each Ruler signed were

"Now Therefore I ...... Ruler of ...... in the exercise of my sovereignty in and over my said State do hereby execute this my Instrument of Accession".

and clause 8 provided that -

"Nothing in this Instrument affects the continuance of my sovereignty in and over this State, or save as provided by and under this Instrument, the exercise of any powers, authority and rights now enjoyed by me as Ruler of this State or the validity of any law at present in force in this State".

4. Broadly speaking, the effect of the accession was to retain to the Rulers their full autonomy and sovereignty except on three subjects. Defence, External Affairs and Communications. These were transferred to the Central Government of the new Dominion.

5. One other clause is important, clause 6, which provided that -

"Nothing in this Instrument shall empower the Dominion Legislature to make any law for the State authorising the compulsory acquisition of land for any purpose...."

6. About the same time, each acceding Ruler entered into a standstill agreement with the Dominion of India. The following clause is relevant:

"Nothing in this agreement includes the exercise of any paramountcy functions".

7. The alienations now in question, were made in January 1948. On 5-1-1948 the ruler of Sarila granted the village Rigwara to the petitioners and on 28-1-1948 the Ruler of Charkhari granted the villages Patha, Kua and Aichana, also to the petitioners.

8. After this, on 13-3-1948, thirty-five States in Bundelkhand and Baghelkhand (including Charkhari and Sarila) agreed to unite themselves into one State which was to be called the United State of Vindhya Pradesh. In pursuance of this agreement each of the thirty-five Rulers signed a covenant on 18-3-1948 which brought the new State into being.

It is important to note that this was a purely domestic arrangement between themselves and not a treaty with the Dominion of India. Each Ruler necessarily surrendered a fraction of his sovereignty to the whole but there was no further surrender of sovereign powers to the Dominion of India beyond those already surrendered in 1947, namely Defence, External Affairs and Communications. Despite the readjustment, the sum total of the sovereignties which had resided in each before the covenant now resided in the whole and its component parts: none of it was lost to the Dominion of India.

9. Soon after this, the Revenue Officers of the newly formed Vindhya Pradesh Union tried to interfere with the grants made by certain rulers of the integrating States before the integrations: This occasioned complaints to the Vindhya Pradesh Government and that Government decided on 7-12