Judgment

HEGDE, J.:- In this batch of appeals, the validity of the Madras Inam Estates (Abolition and Conversion Into Ryotwari) Act, 1963 (Madras Act 26 of 1963); the Madras Lease-Holds (Abolition and Conversion Into Ryotwari) Act, l963 (Madras Act 27 of 1963) and the Madras Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion Into Ryotwari) Act 1963 (Madras Act 30 of 1363) is challenged on the ground that the material provisions in those Acts are violative of Arts 14, 1 3 (1) (f) and 31 of the Constitution The provisions in these Acts reducing the tenants liability to pay the arrears of rent are also challenged on the ground that the legislature had no competence to enact those provisions. A few other minor contentions are also raised in these appeals to which reference will be made in the course of the judgment. All these contentions had been unsuccessfully urged before the High Court. Dealing with the allegation of infringement of Arts. 14, 19 and 31, the High Court in addition to holding that there has been no infringement of those Articles has further held that the challenge to the validity of these Acts on the basis of those Articles is precluded in view of Art. 31-A. Dealing with the contention relating to the reduction of rent the High Court came to the conclusion that the legislature had power to enact the impugned provisions. The High Court also has given reasons for rejecting the other contentions advanced before it. Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court these appeals have been brought by special leave.

2. The impugned statutes deal with agrarian reforms. They purport to deal with Inam lands. It is profitless to go to the origin of Inams or about their early history. Suffice it to say that the Urdu word "Inam" means a gift. The Inams grants were made by the Rulers for various purposes Some of them were granted to institutions and some to individuals. Broadly speaking there were three types of Inams. The first type consisted of the grant of the melwaram right alone. The second category consisted of the grant of both the melwaram as well as the kudivaram right. In addition to these two Inams, there were what are known as Minor Inams. Sometime prior to 1862, the Government took up the question of enfranchising the Inams. The Inams Commissioner went into the rights of various persons claiming to be Inamdars. Thereafter the Madras Enfranchised Inams Act, 1862 (Madras Act IV of 1862) was passed for declaring and confirming the title of the Inamdars. Section 2 of that Act provided that the title deeds issued by the Inams Commissioner or an authenticated- extract from the register of the Commissioner or Collector shall be deemed sufficient proof of the enfranchisement of land previously held on Inam tenure. By Madras Inams (Assessment) Act, 1956 (Madras Act 40 of 1956), full assessment was levied on all Inam lands except melwaram Inams granted on service tenure, without affecting in any way the rights as between the Inamdar and other persons, if any, in possession or enjoyment of the Inam land.

3. Where the loam comprised the entire village, the same was treated as an "estate" in the Madras Proprietary Estates Village Service Act, 1894 (Madras Act 2 of 1894) and the Madras Hereditary Village Offices Act 1895 (Madras Act 3 of 1895) as well as in Madras Estates Land Act, 1908 (Madras Act 1 of 1908). Madras Estates Land Act, 1908 recognised the ryots permanent tenure. That Act secured a permanent right of occupancy to every ryot who at the commencement, was in possession of "ryoti" land or who was subsequently admitted to the possession of such land. Then came the Madras Estates Land (Third Amendment) Act, 1936 (Madras Act 18 of 1936). That Act amplified the definition of the "estate" in the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908,so as to bring within its scope all Inam villages, of which the grant was made, confirmed or recognised by the Government. It also provided that when a question arises whether any land was the landholder s private land