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

1984 Supreme(SC) 116

A.N.SEN, P.N.BHAGWATI, RANGANATH MISRA
Manchegowda – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent


JUDGMENT

AMARENDRA NATH SEN, J.:—The question for consideration in Civil Appeal No. 3116 of 1983 by certificate granted by the High Court is, whether the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for the sake of brevity) is constitutionally valid or not.

2. The writ petition out of which this appeal arises was filed in the High Court along with a number of other writ petitions filed by various other parties challenging the validity of the Act. The High Court for reasons recorded in the judgment upheld the validity of the Act and dismissed this writ petition and also the other writ petitions. The High Court granted certificate under Arts. 132 and 133 of the Constitution and this appeal has been filed with the certificate granted by the High Court. As the identical question is involved in all these appeals and special leave petitions, this judgment will also dispose of all the appeals and special leave petitions.

3. Inasmuch as the vires of the Act has been challenged essentially on legal grounds, it does not become necessary for us to set out the facts at any great length. The broad facts co










































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