Judgement

HEGDE, J. :- In these connected appeals by certificates the question that arises for decision is whether the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Cash Grants Act of 1963 (Act No. XVI of 1963) is ultra vires the provisions of the Constitution. The respondents in these appeals were entitled to receive cash grants from the Government of Madhya Pradesh. The impugned Act abolished such grants but provided for the payment of certain compensation to the grantees. The respondents challenged the vires of the Act before the High Court Madhya Pradesh in Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 21 and 22 of 1963, on various grounds. The High Court rejected all the contentions advanced on behalf of the respondents, excepting one, namely, that the Act is ultra vires of Article 19 (1) (f) of the Constitution and is not saved by sub-article (5) thereof. After obtaining from the High Court certificates under Article 133 (1) (c), the State of Madhya Pradesh has filed these appeals. The State is challenging the correctness of the decision of the High Court to the extent it went against it. The respondents on their part, in addition to supporting the findings of the High Court which are in their favour, relied also on the other pleas taken by them before the High Court. As we are of the opinion that the impugned Act is either violative of Article 31 (23 or, in the alternative, Art. 19 (1) (f) of the Constitution, we have not thought it necessary to go into the other contentions taken on behalf of the respondents.

2. Before the impugned Act was enacted, the State of Madhya Bharat which forms part of the new State of Madhya Pradesh, purported to abolish the cash grants payable by it by means of an executive order. That order was unsuccessfully challenged by Madhorao Phalke and others before the High Court. But in appeal this Court in Madhorao Phalke v. State of Madhya Bharat, (1961) SCR 967 quashed the order in question, holding that the grants in question were recognised by the Kalambandis of 1912 and 1935 issued by the Rulers of Gwalior and those kalambandis are existing laws within the meaning of Article 372 of the Constitution and consequently the same could not be abrogated by means of an executive order. It may be noted that in that appeal, the appellant challenged the order in question on two grounds, namely - (1) that as his right to receive the cash grant had been statutorily recognised by the State of Gwalior, it was not open to the Government of Madhya Bharat to extinguish that right merely by an executive order, and (2) that that right being property the same could not be divested without payment of compensation under Article 31 of the Constitution. This Court allowed the appeal on the first ground and consequently it did not deal with the second. After the decision of this Court in that case the impugned Act was enacted by the Madhya Pradesh legislature on April 5, 1963. It received the assent of the President on July 25, 1963 and was published in the Madhya Pradesh Gazette, Extraordinary on August 2, 1963. The Act comes into force on such date as the Government may by notification appoint. Even before that notification was issued, the petitions from which these appeals arise were instituted in the High Court. We are given to understand that in view of those petitions the Act has not yet been brought into force.

3. The long title of the Act says that it is an Act to provide for the discontinuance of cash grants in Madhya Pradesh and to make provisions for other matters connected therewith. It contains twelve sections. Section 1 sets out the short title, extent and commencement of the Act. Section 2 defines some of the expressions found in the Act. Section 3 is the most important section. It purports to abolish certain cash grants. Section 4 provides for settlement of claims by the grantees. Section 5 provides the manner of determining the compensation payable. Section 8 prescribes that appeal, revision and review under the Act to be in accordance wi