SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1956 Supreme(Ori) 56

HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Narasimham, C. J. And G. C. Das, J.
NABIN CHANDRA GANTAYET - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA - Respondent
O. J. C.  146  Of  1956
Decided On : OCTOBER 26, 1956

Advocates Appeared:
H.MOHAPATRA

A law that classifies individuals or things for the purpose of legislation must be based on an intelligent differentia that distinguishes the group from others and must have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the statute.

Headnote:

ORISSA TENANTS RELIEF ACT, 1955 - CONSTITUTIONALITY - ARTICLE 14 - DISCRIMINATION - ARTICLE 19 (1) (F) - UNREASONABLE RESTRICTION ON RIGHT TO HOLD PROPERTY - VALIDITY.

Fact of the Case:

The Orissa Tenants Relief Act, 1955 (the Act) was challenged on the grounds that it violated Articles 14 and 19(1)(f) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner, a landowner, argued that the Act discriminated against certain classes of tenants and imposed unreasonable restrictions on his right to hold property.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the Act was constitutional and did not violate Articles 14 and 19(1)(f) of the Constitution.

Issues: 1. Whether the Act discriminated against certain classes of tenants in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution? 2. Whether the Act imposed unreasonable restrictions on the petitioner's right to hold property in violation of Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Act did not discriminate against certain classes of tenants in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court found that the classification of tenants under the Act was based on reasonable grounds and that the Act did not arbitrarily or excessively invade the rights of any particular class of tenants. 2. The Court held that the Act did not impose unreasonable restrictions on the petitioner's right to hold property in violation of Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution. The Court found that the reduction in rent and the procedural provisions of the Act were reasonable and necessary to achieve the legitimate objectives of the Act, which were to protect tenants from eviction and to reduce the incidence of produce rent.

Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petition and upheld the validity of the Act.

NARASIMHAM, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution by the owner of wet lands in village Raghunathpur, in Chatrapur Taluk of Ganjam-district, challenging the validity of the Orissa. Tenants Relief Act 1955 (Orissa Act V of 1955) (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).

( 2 ) IN 1948 the Orissa Legislature passed an Act known as the Orissa Tenants protection Act for the purpose of granting temporary protection from eviction to the tiller of the soil (usually known as Bhagchassis) and also for reducing the produce rent payable by a tenant to his landlord. After the coming into force of the constitution the validity of this Act was unsuccessfully challenged before a Division bench of this Court in the case reported in Sashi Bushan v. Mangal, ILR (1953)Cut 45: (AIR 1953 Orissa 171) (A ). In that decision the full history of the circumstances leading to the passing of the orissa Tenants Protection Act was given and it is unnecessary to repeat the same here. It is sufficient to say that the Legislature thought that the insecurity of tenure of the actual cultivator was mainly responsible for the deficiency in agricultural production and that the incidence of produce rent was so heavy as to leave a very inadequate return to the actual cultivator for his labour and enterprise. It was to remedy these defects that the said Act was passed and it remained on the statute book after being extended from time to time by competent authorities, till 15th April 1955. In 1951 the Orissa Legislature passed the well-known Orissa estate Abolition Act whose main purpose was to eliminate intermediaries between the Government and the actual cultivators by acquiring their rights on payment of compensation. In pursuance of that Act most of the estates of proprietors in North and South orissa have been taken over by Government but there still remains a large class of intermediaries in North Orissa known as tenurehofders whose interests have not yet been acquired. Moreover, there are a number of ryots both in North and South orissa who are in possession of large tracts of land which they are unable to cultivate personally and which are generally settled on produce rent with the bhagchassis who are the actual tillers of the soil, The Tenants Protection Act doubtless gave those Bhagchassis protection from eviction and also substantial reduction in the produce rent payable to their immediate landlord. But as the life of that Act expired on the 15th April 1955 and there was a genuine apprehension that further legislation relating to land reform would be initiated by government resulting in the elimination of other classes of intermediaries between the Government and the actual tiller including even big ryots, there was a danger that these intermediaries would attempt to evict the actual cultivators from their lands on a large scale. With a view to avoid this evil, the Orissa 'tenants Relief Act was passed on the 21st April 1955, and the Preamble to that Act which makes the object clear is as follows:-

"whereas subsequent to the passing of the Orissa Estate Abolition Act 1951 and pending further legislation relating to land reforms large-scale eviction of tenants from actual cultivation of agricultural lands is being resorted to by the owners of such lands; and whereas pending such further legislation it is expedient to afford relief to such person by providing for their temporary protection from such eviction and for conferring on them certain other privileges in the manner hereinafter appearing; etc. "

The Act was given retrospective effect from the first day of July 1954 and the orissa Tenants Protection Act was also repealed retrospectively from that date. There was, however, a saving clause (Section 19) by which the rights and privileges acquired under the Tenants Protection Act, as well as pending proceedings, appointments orders, etc. , made under that Act, were all saved. The act closely follows the pattern of the Orissa T

























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top