JUDGMENT

PUNCHHI, J.:- We are required in this matter to interplay some of the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling an& Regulation) Act, 1976 to determine whether the appellant herein had any excess vacant land.

2. Smt. Probhavati Poddar (pro forma respondent herein) was the owner of two properties in the city of Calcutta being (i) premises No. P-290, C.I.T. Road, comprising 414.56 sq. mtrs. of land of which 321 sq. mtrs. was covered by a building, constructed thereon long before the coming into force of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereafter referred to as the Act), with a dwelling unit therein, and (ii) property No. P-210, C.I.T. Scheme VII (M), Calcutta comprising 339.65 sq. mtrs. of vacant land. Hereafter these would be referred to as the built-up property and vacant property respectively. The exact date/period of. the construction of the built-up property is not available on the present record but the litigation has proceeded on the footing that it was constructed long before February 17, 1976, the day when the Act came into force in the State of West Bengal.

3. The State Legislature of 11 States, including the State of West Bengal, considered it desirable to have a uniform legislation enacted by Parliament for the imposition of ceiling on urban property for the country as a whole, and in compliance with Cl. (1) of Art. 252 of the Constitution, passed a Resolution to that effect. Accordingly, the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Bill, 1976 was introduced in the Lok Sabba on January 28, 1976 covering all the Union Territories and the 11 resolving States. After the passing of the Bill by the Parliament, the Act came into force on February 17, 1976 at once. Later from time to time, the Act was adopted by some other States after passing Resolutions under Art. 252(1) of the Constitution. The Act now apparently is in force in 17 States and all the Union Territories in the country.

4. The primary object and purpose of the Act was to provide for the imposition of the ceiling on vacant land in urban agglomerations, for the acquisition of such land in excess of the ceiling limit, to regulate the construction of buildings on such land for matters connected therewith, with a view to preventing the concentration of urban land in the hands of a few persons and speculation and profiteering therein, and with a view to bringing about an equitable distribution of land in urban agglomerations to subserve the common good, and in furtherance of the directive principles of Arts. 39(B) and (C) of the Constitution. These features were spelled out by this Court in Union of India v. V. R. Chaudhary (1979) 3 SCR 802. That it is valid piece of legislation save and except S. 27(1), and had received the protective umbrella of Art. 31 -C as it stood prior to its amendment by 42nd Amendment Act was held by this Court in Maharao Sahib Shri Bhim Singhji v. Union of India (198 1) 1 SCC 166.

5. "Appointed day" has been defined in S. 2-A of the Act. It means (i) in relation to any State to which the Act applies in the first instance, the date of introduction of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Bill, 1976 in Parliament, and (ii) in relation to any State which adopts the Act under Cl. (1) of Art. 252 of the Constitution, the date of such adoption. In relation to the State of West Bengal, in which the town of Calcutta is situated, the "appointed day" is January 281 1976. It is thus evident that between the appointed day and the date of enforcement of the Act, there is a 20 days gap.

6. The Act ordains a ceiling limit of 500 sq. metrs. for the urban agglomeration of Calcutta, as per Item 18 of Category A in schedule of the Act. Both the properties of Smt. Poddar, the pro forma respondent herein, thus became liable to be screened by the Authorities under the Act. Beforehand on July 8, 1978, Smt. Poddar entered into an agreement with Smt. Meera Gupta, the appellant herein, to sell the vacant property on terms entered. On November 23, 197