SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1971 Supreme(SC) 310

P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, G. K. MITTER, S. M. SIKRI, A. N. RAY, C. A. VAIDIALINGAM
Latafat Ali Khan – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


Judgment

SIKRI, C.J.I.- This petition under Article 32 has been filed by the three appellants in Civil Appeals Nos. 2018-2020 of 1968, in which we have just delivered judgment. In this petition the vires of Section 6, clause (xvii), of the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (U. P. Act I of 1961) -hereinafter referred to as the Act- and Rule 4 (4) of the U. P. Imposition of Ceilings on Land Holdings Rules, 1961 have been challenged. It is urged that these provisions violate Articles 14, 19 (1) (f) and (g) and 31(1) of the Constitution. The learned counsel for the State contended that the impugned provisions are protected by Article 31-B of the Constitution, as the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 is included in the Ninth Schedule as item 58. The learned counsel for the petitioners, in reply, urged (1) that the impugned provisions have nothing to do with land reform, and (2) that rules made under the Act do not enjoy the protection of Article 31-B. It is admitted that the land in dispute is a holding within Section 3 (d) of the Act. The definition reads :

"Holding" means the land or lands held by a person as a bhumidhar, sirdar, asami




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top