IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Subba Rao, Shah, Kapur, Hidayatullah, Dayal, JJ.
MAHANTA SANKARSHAN RAMANUJA DAS GOSWAMI - APPELLANT
Versus
THE STATE OF ORISSA AND ANOTHER - RESPONDENT
Civil Appeals Nos. 474 to 501, 503 to 505, 508 to 512, 514 and 515 of 1959
Decided On : 22-08-1961
ESTATE ABOLITION - ORISSA ESTATES ABOLITION ACT, 1951 (ACT 1 OF 1952) AS AMENDED BY THE ORISSA ESTATES ABOLITION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1954 (ACT XXVII OF 1954) - NOTIFICATION NO. 4971-XV-2154-E.A DATED JULY 15, 1955 - VALIDITY - PRE-SETTLEMENT MINOR INAMS - WHETHER COVERED BY THE DEFINITION OF ?ESTATE? - ARTICLE 31A OF THE CONSTITUTION - APPLICABILITY - EJUSDEM GENERIS RULE.
Fact of the Case:
Appellants, holders of pre-settlement minor inams in Orissa, challenged the validity of Notification No. 4971-XV-2154-E.A dated July 15, 1955, issued by the Orissa State Government, and the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1951 (Act 1 of 1952) as amended by the Orissa Estates Abolition (Amendment) Act, 1954 (Act XXVII of 1954), contending that they were beyond the competence of the State and the Orissa State Legislature.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the impugned notification and the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1951, as amended, were valid and constitutional.
Issues: 1. Whether the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1951 (Act 1 of 1952) as amended by the Orissa Estates Abolition (Amendment) Act, 1954 (Act XXVII of 1954) and the impugned notification were beyond the competence of the State and the Orissa State Legislature? 2. Whether the definition of ?estate? in the Abolition Act included pre-settlement minor inams?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the amending Act was not a new law but an extension of the original Act, and the President's assent to the amending Act brought in the protection of Article 31A as a necessary consequence. 2. The Court rejected the argument that the definition of ?estate? in the Abolition Act did not apply to pre-settlement minor inams, holding that the definition was sufficiently wide to cover such inams and that Section 2(q) of the Abolition Act, which provided for reference to local laws for the definition of undefined words, was not applicable in this case.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the appeals with costs.
JUDGMENT :
Hidayatullah, J. - These are 38 appeals against the judgment and orders of the High Court of Orissa dated November 28, 1956, by which 42 petitions "under Article 226 of the constitution filed by the present Appellants and some others were dismissed. The High Court certified the cases as fit for appeal to this Court under Article 132 (1) of the Constitution.
2. The Appellants are holders of pre-settlement minor inams in the State of Orissa. Their grants are different both in regard to the time when they were made and the lands involved in them. They were made for performance of services of deities and were classed as Devadayam grants in the revenue papers. The grants in all these cases were not of whole villages but of certain lands and hence their classification as minor inams, and they comprised both the melwaram and Kudiwaram rights in the lands. It is not necessary to refer to these cases separately, since a single argument was addressed before us involving the consideration whether Notification No. 4971-XV-2154-E.A dated July 15, 1955, issued by the Orissa State Government, and the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1951 (Act 1 of 1952) as amended by the Orissa Estates Abolition (Amendment) Act, 1954 (Act XXVII of 1954) were respectively beyond the competence of the State and the Orissa State Legislature.
3. By the original Act, all estates of the intermediaries were abolished, and on a notification by the Government, such estates vested in Government. By the amending Act, the definition of "estate" was widened to cover even such minor inams, and then the impugned notification was issued, The Appellants contend that the original Act and the amending Act were jointly or severally beyond the competence of the State Legislature, and that the notification above mentioned was void and without any effect.
4. The Bill resulting in the original Act was introduced on January 17, 1950, and the Act was passed by the Legislative Assembly on September 28, 1951. It was reserved for the consideration of the President, who gave his assent on January 23, 1952. In the Act, before its amendment in 1954, "estate" was defined as follows:
2(g) ?Estate? means any land held by an intermediary and included under one entry in ?any of the general ?registers of revenue-paying lands and revenue-free lands, prepared and maintained under the law for the time being in force by the Collector of a district, and includes revenue-free lands not entered in any register and all classes of tenures or under-tenures, or an inam estate or part of an estate.
5. By the amending Act of 1954, this definition was substituted by another, which read:
2(g) ?estate? includes a part of an estate and means any land held by or vested in an Intermediary and included under one entry in any revenue roll or any of the general registers of revenue-paying lands and revenue free lands, prepared and maintained under the law -relating to land revenue for the time being in force or under any rule, order, custom or usage having the force of law, and includes revenue-free lands not entered in any register or revenue-roll and all classes of tenures or under-tenures and any jagir, inam, or muafi or other similar grant.
6. In the original Act as well as in the Act as amended, there was a general provision in Section 2(q) which may be read here:
(q) all words and expressions used in this Act but not defined in it, shall have, with reference to any part of the State of Orissa, the same meaning as defined in the tenancy Jaws and rules for the time being in force, and in the absence of written laws and rules, as recognised in the custom for the time being obtaining in that part of the State of Orissa.
In the original Act, a provision was inserted by Section 3 of the amending Act to the following effect:
3. For the purpose of removal of all doubts it is declared that such lands and such rights in relation thereto and such persons who hold such lands and such rights as Were heretofore covered by the d
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.