The State cannot acquire land compulsorily for purposes other than public, and any provision that allows such acquisition is ultra vires the Constitution.

HARRIES, C.J. :- The petitioners in these two cases had applied to this Court under Art. 228 of the Constitution praying that the records of two suits pending before a learned Subordinate Judge at Alipore should be transferred to this Court for the decision of certain constitutional points which were said to arise in the suits. The records were in due course transferred to this Court and this Bench heard the parties on the constitutional questions involved in the suits.

2. The suits arose out of acquisitions of property made by the West Bengal Government under the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act, 1948. It was suggested on behalf of the opposite parties that the whole of this Act was ultra vires and if such was not the case that three provisions of the Act were ultra vires. This Bench eventually held in a judgment delivered on March 22, 1951 that the whole of the Act was not ultra vires. It further held that a portion of S. 8 proviso (b) of the Act was ultra vires, but as the offending portion was severable from the remainder of proviso (b) of S. 8 the whole proviso was not ultra vires.

3. It was further contended that two other portions of S. 8 of this Act were ultra vires, namely, the opening portion of S. 8 which is in these terms : "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 the Explanation to proviso (a) of this section which reads as follows :

"For the purposes of this clause the decision of the Provincial Government as to whether any land is or is not waste or arable land shall be final."

4. At the previous hearing, it is now clear, that there was a misunderstanding as to the position taken by the opposite parties with regard to these impugned portions of S. 8. The Bench understood that it was not suggested in the cases that the purposes for which the lands were being acquired were other than a public purpose, and further that it was not suggested that the State Government had described any of the land which they had taken possession of or had sought to possess as other than what in fact it was.

5. The Bench therefore did not come to any definite conclusion as to whether these portions of S. 8 of the Act were or were not ultra vires the Constitution. But for the purpose of considering whether the whole Act was ultra vires the Bench assumed, without deciding the question, that these provisions were ultra vires. Even so the Bench eventually held that the whole Act could not be described as ultra vires.

6. However it is now clear that the opposite parties in the suits do contend that Government acquired or sought to acquire these lands for a purpose which was not public. It is further contended that the lands sought to be acquired were such that Government could not take possession of the same before acquisition as provided by S. 8 proviso (a) of the Act. It is said that in order to take possession of these lands the nature of the lands was misdescribed by the Collector whose decision is final if the Explanation, to proviso (a) to S. 8 is intra vires.

7. As there was a clear misunderstanding it was agreed that the previous judgment in these matters should be reviewed and this Court should decide whether or not these two portions of S. 8 are or are not ultra vires. I do not think it is necessary to discuss how this misunderstanding arose. It is admitted that the standpoint of the opposite parties was misunderstood both by the Bench and by the learned Advocate General and it is now conceded that there is an error apparent on the face of the record or something very similar and therefore this Court can and should review the judgment delivered under the provisions of O. 47 r. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure

8. In the previous judgment I set out the provisions of this Act at considerable length. The purpose of the Act was the acquisition and development of land for public purposes and by S. 2(d) of the Ac