Back
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
P. B. Mukharji, B. C. Mitra
RANADEB CHOUDHURI - Appellant
Versus
LAND ACQUISITION JUDGE, 24-PARGANAS - Respondent
Civil Revn. Case 2835 Of 1967
Decided On : JANUARY 13, 1971
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - ARTICLE 228 - SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW - INTERPRETATION OF CONSTITUTION - WEST BENGAL LAND DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING ACT (ACT XXI OF 1948) - AMENDMENT ACT XXIII OF 1955 - VALIDITY - ARTICLE 14, 31 AND 31-B OF THE CONSTITUTION - INTERPRETATION.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's mother owned about 10 bighas of land in Jadavpur, which was notified for settlement of immigrants under the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act (Act XXI of 1948). The land was acquired under the said Act and the petitioner challenged the acquisition on the ground that the amendment to the Act, which provided for different rates of compensation for land acquired for different purposes, violated Articles 14 and 31 of the Constitution. The petitioner also contended that the amendment was protected from challenge under Article 31-B of the Constitution.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the questions raised by the petitioner involved substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution and that the case should be withdrawn from the subordinate court for determination of these questions.
Issues: 1. Whether the questions raised by the petitioner involved substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution. 2. Whether the amendment to the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act was protected from challenge under Article 31-B of the Constitution. 3. Whether the amendment violated Articles 14 and 31 of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the questions raised by the petitioner involved substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution because they involved the interpretation of Article 31-B of the Constitution and Item 20 of the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution, as well as the interpretation of Article 31 (2) of the Constitution read with Articles 31-A and 31-B of the Constitution regarding the adequacy of compensation. 2. The Court held that the amendment to the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act was not protected from challenge under Article 31-B of the Constitution because the amendment was made after the Act was included in the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution and therefore did not enjoy the immunity granted by Article 31-B. 3. The Court held that the amendment violated Articles 14 and 31 of the Constitution because it provided for different rates of compensation for land acquired for different purposes, which was discriminatory.
Final Decision: The Court made an order withdrawing the pending case from the subordinate court for determination of the substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.
( 1 ) THIS Rule under Article 228 of the Constitution of India raises an interesting question about the meaning and scope of the expression, "a substantial question of law as to the Interpretation of this Constitution. "
( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to this Rule are as follows:-- The petitioner is Ranadeb Choudhuri. The respondents are the Land Acquisition Judge. 24-Parganas, the Land Acquisition Collector, 24-Parganas, and the State of West Bengal through the Secretary, Land and Land Revenue Department. The petitioner's mother Sm. Sarasi Bala Devi (now deceased) was the owner of about 10 bighas (3. 30 acres) of land in Jadavpur, Police station Tollygunge within the municipal jurisdiction of Calcutta Municipality. This land is said to be valuable. By Notification No. 13982 L. Dev, dated the 22nd July 1955, published in the Calcutta Gazette dated the 11th August, 1955, these lands were notified under Section 4 of the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act (Act XXI of 1948) for settlement of immigrants who have migrated into the State of West Bengal. By a further declaration No. 10848 L. Dev, dated the 15th June, 1957, published in the Calcutta Gazette dated the 4th July, 1957, these lands were acquired under Section 6 of the said Act.
( 3 ) THE Governor of West Bengal on the 8th April, 1955, promulgated the West Bengal Land Development and Planning (Amendment) Ordinance of 1955, by Section 2 whereof Section 8 of the main Act was amended in the following terms:"2. Notwithstanding anything contained in the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act 1948 the conditions mentioned at the end of Clause (b) of the proviso to Section 8 thereof shall not apply and shall be deemed to have never applied in relation to land which is or has been acquired in pursuance of the said Act for any public purpose other than the purposes specified in Sub-clause (i) of Clause (d) of Section 2 thereof. "this was followed by the West Bengal Act XXIII of 1955 which came into force on the 21st September, 1955. Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act (Act XXI of 1948) was amended. The amendment inter alia provided as follows:--" (1) in Sub-section (1) of that section, as so re-numbered- (a) for the words "a declaration under Section 6 shall be conclusive evidence that the land in respect of which the declaration is made is needed for a public purpose and after making such declaration" the words "after making a declaration under Section 6" shall be substituted; (b) in Clause (a) of the proviso for the words "any other waste or arable land" the words "any waste or arable land" shall be substituted; (c) the explanation to Clause (a) of the proviso shall be omitted; (d) in the condition mentioned at the end of Clause (b) of the proviso, after the words "if such market value" the words "in relation to land acquired for the public purpose specified in Sub-clause (i) of Clause (d) of Section 2" shall be inserted and shall be deemed always to have been inserted; and (2) after Sub-section (1) of the said section, as so re-numbered, the following sub-section shall be added, namely: ' (2) When the amount of compensation has been determined under Sub-section (1), the Collector shall make an award in accordance with the principles set out in Section 11 of the said Act, but no amount referred to in Sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the said Act shall be included in the award'. "
( 4 ) IT is the allegation in the petition that as a result of the amendment there has been a denial of equality within the meaning of Article 14 of the Constitutlon of India. The petitioner's case is that the same land may be acquired under the said Act but if the purpose of the acquisition which is immaterial to the owner is for the purpose other than settlement of immigrants, the owner is entitled to get compensation at the market value of the land on the date of the publication of the Notification under Section 4. But if such land is ac
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
