Judgement

Facts : - This was a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It prayed that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court would be pleased to issue a Writ in the nature of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the papers relating to the notification issued under Section 3(2) of Madras Estates Land (Reduction of Rent) Act, 30 of 1947, in respect of fixation of rent in the petitioners village of China Venkatapuram Agraharam in Narasannapeta Taluk (now Srikakulam District) covered by Notification No. 4773, at page 2092 of Fort. St. George Gazette elated 27-6-1950 and to quash the proceedings therein. This petition was heard by Honble Mr. Justice Bhimasankaram. It was argued before him, inter alia that the Rent Reduction Act itself was ultra vires for the reason that it was contrary to the terms of Art. 31 of the Constitution and S. 299 of the Government of India Act, 1935. As this involved interpretation of the Constitution, he was of the opinion that the matter should be considered by a Bench.

Accordingly the writ petition was heard, on 19th July 1955 by a Division Bench consisting of Honble Mr. K. Subba Rao, Chief Justice and Honble Mr. Justice Bhimasankaram. It was argued before this Division Bench that the decision in Rajah of Bobbili v. State of Madras (AIR 1952 Mad 203) needed to be reconsidered in the light of the two subsequent decisions of the Supreme Court respectively in State of West Bengal v. Subodh Gopal Bose (AIR 1954 SC 92), and Dwarkadas Srinivas v. Sholapur Spinning and Weaving Co. Ltd., (AIR 1954 SC 119). It was, therefore, thought desirable that the question being a matter of considerable general importance it should be decided by a Full Bench. Hence, it formulated the question to be decided by the Full Bench as follows : -

"Whether the decision in AIR 1952 Mad 203 in so far as it held that Madras Act XXX of 1947 does not offend against Section 299 of the Government of India Act 1935 is good law".

The Full Bench consisting of the Honble Sri K. Subba Rao, Chief Justice, Honble Mr. Justice Viswanatha Sastry and the Honble Mr. Justice Krishna Rao expressed on 15-3-1956 the following : -

OPINION OF FULL BENCH.

SUBBA RAO, C.J. : -

The following question has been referred to the Full Bench by a Divisional Bench of this Court : -

"Whether the decision in Rajah of Bobbili v. State of Madras, 1952-1 Mad LJ 174 : (AIR 1952 Mad 203) (A), in so far as it held that Madras Act XXX of 1947 does not offend against S. 299 of the Government of India Act, 1935, is good law?"

2. Before I proceed to consider the question, it will be convenient to notice briefly the provisions of Madras Estates Land (Reduction of Rent) Act, XXX of 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and the scope of the decision in Rajah of Bobbili v. State of Madras (A) (supra). The descriptive title of the Act is : An Act to provide for the reduction of rents payable by ryots in estates governed by the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908, approximately to the level of the assessments levied on lands in ryotwari areas in the neighbourhood (and for the collection of such rents exclusively by the State Government)." The preamble says : "Whereas the rents now payable by ryots in estates governed by the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908, are in many cases substantially higher than the assessments levied on lands in ryotwari areas in the neighbourhood; and whereas it is expedient to provide for the reduction of such rents approximately to the level of the ryotwari assessments in the neighbourhood; (and for the collection of such rents exclusively by the State Government)." The words in the brackets, both in the long title as well as in the preamble, were added by S. 2 of the Madras Estates Land (Reduction of Rent) Amendment Act, 1951 (Madras Act VII of 1951). Sections 2 and 3 prescribe the matter in which the rents are reduced to ryotwari level and fixed. The rent fixed shall take effect from the commencement of the fasli year