Back
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
P. B. MUKHARJI, B. C. MISRA
DEBI MATA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Respondent
A. F. O. O. 42 Of 1972
Decided On : May 3, 1972
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 - ARTICLE 226 - WRIT PETITION - CHALLENGING NOTIFICATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS ISSUED BY STATE OF WEST BENGAL - TRANSFER OF TERRITORIES ACT, 1956 - SECTION 3, 43 AND 44 - WEST BENGAL TRANSFERRED TERRITORIES (ASSIMILATION OF LAWS) ACT, 1958 - SECTION 3 AND SCHEDULE 2 - WEST BENGAL ESTATES ACQUISITION ACT, 1953 - SECTION 4, 52, 60 AND 61 - BIHAR LAND REFORMS ACT, 1950 - SECTION 3-B - WEST BENGAL ESTATES ACQUISITION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1963 - SECTION 2 - WEST BENGAL ESTATES ACQUISITION RULES, 1964 - RULE 6 (1) - VALIDITY OF NOTIFICATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS - DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWER - REPEAL OF BIHAR LAND REFORMS ACT, 1950 - APPLICABILITY OF WEST BENGAL ESTATES ACQUISITION ACT, 1953 TO TRANSFERRED TERRITORIES - INTERPRETATION OF STATUTORY PROVISIONS.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, representing the family deity of Panchkote Raj Estate, challenged the notifications and proclamations issued by the State of West Bengal under various Acts and Sections, including the Transfer of Territories Act, 1956, the West Bengal Transferred Territories (Assimilation of Laws) Act, 1958, the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, and the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950. The petitioners contended that these notifications and proclamations were invalid due to the delegation of legislative power to the executive, improper repeal of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, and procedural defects.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the notifications and proclamations issued by the State of West Bengal were valid and the challenges raised by the petitioners were dismissed. The Court found that there was no improper delegation of legislative power to the executive, as the legislature had clearly defined the scope and extent of the executive's authority. The Court also held that the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, was validly repealed by the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, and that the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, was validly applied to the transferred territories.
Issues: 1. Whether there was an improper delegation of legislative power to the executive in the issuance of the notifications and proclamations by the State of West Bengal? 2. Whether the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, was validly repealed by the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953? 3. Whether the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, was validly applied to the transferred territories?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that there was no improper delegation of legislative power to the executive, as the legislature had clearly defined the scope and extent of the executive's authority. The Court relied on the decision in Queen v. Burah, (1878) 5 Ind App 178 (PC), where the Privy Council held that the legislature could delegate the power to the executive to determine the time and manner of carrying out a legislative scheme, as long as the legislature itself had determined the essential features of the scheme. 2. The Court held that the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, was validly repealed by the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, as the West Bengal legislature had the competence to legislate on matters involving the acquisition of estates and rights of intermediaries in respect of transferred territories. The Court noted that Section 43 of the Transfer of Territories Act, 1956, expressly provided for the transitional application of laws to the transferred territories pending the matter being taken up by the competent legislature. 3. The Court held that the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, was validly applied to the transferred territories, as the West Bengal legislature had the legislative authority to do so. The Court rejected the argument that the application of the Act to the transferred territories amounted to an abdication of legislative power by the West Bengal legislature.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petitions challenging the notifications and proclamations issued by the State of West Bengal. The Court found that there was no improper delegation of legislative power to the executive, that the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, was validly repealed by the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, and that the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, was validly applied to the transferred territories.
( 1 ) THESE appeals are from the judgment and order of Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sen made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In these five Rules, the petitioners are challenging three Notifications and two Proclamations issued by the State of West Bengal issued by the State of West Bengal or its authority. As common questions have raised in all these Rules, they were heard and disposed of by the learned trial Judge by one judgment. We in these appeals have followed the same procedure.
( 2 ) IT is not disputed that the facts relevant to the issues are the same or similar. The facts set out in Civil Rule No. 565 (W) of 1964 are taken as in the main petition. In this petition, the petitioner is Sri Sri Devi Mata is the family deity of Panchkote Raj Estate. The petitioner-appellants have been holding certain land in the intermediary interest in Purulia which was previously within the district of Manbhum in the Bihar. On September 1, 1956, the Bihar and West Bengal (Transfer of Territories) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as Transfer of Territories Act) came into force. By virtue of S. 3 of this Act, major part of Purulia was transferred to West Bengal with effect from 1st November, 1956. Section 43, however, provided that notwithstanding such transfer otherwise enacted by competent legislature or other competent authority, the laws then applicable to the transferred territories would continue to remain operative in such territories. Section 44 of the said Act provided that the appropriate Government may then a year from the date of transfer adapt the laws which continue to remain in force with necessary modifications and that such laws so adapted would remain in force until altered, repealed or amended by a competent authority or a competent legislature. On the date of transfer, the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, which provided the vesting of certain categories of intermediary interests was in force in the territories so transferred to West Bengal. By virtue of Section 43 of the Transfer of territories Act, 1956, the provisions of the said Act continue to remain in force in the transferred territories of Purulia. It is not disputed that the provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, are materially different from the provisions of the corresponding West Bengal Act, namely, the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953.
( 3 ) ON September 24, 1958, an Act passed by the West Bengal Legislature came into effect and that Act was called the West Bengal Transferred Territories (Assimilation of Laws) Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as Assimilation of Laws Act), By provisions of Section 3 of the Assimilation of Laws Act read with Sch. 2 thereof, the provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, were kept in force for the transferred territories including the transferred territories of Purulia. Applying the provisions of the said Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, the Government of West Bengal issued a Proclamation under Section 3 (b) of the said Act announcing its intention to take over the intermediary interest in the transferred territories to West Bengal. The said Proclamation was challenged by the appellants in a Writ petition in this Court which was registered as C. R. 589 (W) of 1963. It is, however, conceded on behalf of the appellants that the petitioners' challenge failed and the Rule was discharged sometime in 1966.
( 4 ) THEN there came another legislative change. In the meantime by West Bengal Act XL of 1963, the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953, was amended by incorporating a new Chapter being Chapter VIII consisting of two sections only. They are Sections 60 and 61. Section 60 of the said Act provided that the provisions of the newly incorporated Chapter shall come into force on such date and in such area of the transferred territories as the State Government may by notification appoint. Section 61 of the said Act provided that on the issue of a notification under Section 60
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
