The restrictions imposed on the petitioner's right to acquire, hold, and dispose of property were reasonable and in the public interest.

Bhandari, J.

1. Two points arises for decision in the present case, viz., (1) whether Section 5 of the Punjab Court of Wards Act is ultra vires the Constitution; and (2) whether the Financial Commissioners notification dated 21-10-1952 placing the estate of the-petitioner under the superintendence of the Court of Wards is mala fide or in excess of the powers conferred by law.

2. On 3-10-1952 the Punjab Government made an order under Section 5(2)(d) of the Punjab Court of Wards Act, 1903, directing that the property of S. Kuldip Singh petitioner, a well-to-do zamin-dar of the Jullundur district, be placed under the superintendence of the Court of Wards and on 21-10-1952 the Financial Commissioner issued a notification under Section 9 of the said Act that the Court of Wards had assumed superintendence of the property with effect from 3-10-1952. The petitioner has submitted a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and principal point which has been agitated before us is that Sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Act of 1903 constitutes an unwarranted abridgment of the petitioners right to acquire, possess and dispose of property.

3. This sub-section is in the following terms: "(2) When it appears to the State Government that any landholder is:

(a) by reason of being a female; or

(b) owing to any physical or mental defect or infirmity; or

(c) owing to his having been convicted of a non-bailable offence and to his vicious habits or bad character; or

(d) owing to his having entered upon a course of wasteful extravagance likely to dissipate his property; incapable of managing or unfitted to manage his affairs, the State Government may make an order directing that the property of such landholder be placed under the superintendence of the Court of Wards: "Provided that such an order shall not be made on the ground stated in Clause (c) or on the ground stated in Clause (d) unless such landholder belongs to a fanrly of political or social importance and the State Government is satis-fled that it is desirable on grounds of public policy or general interest, to make such order."

4. The provisions of this sub-section make it quite clear that the Court of Wards can assume superintendence of the property of a spendthrift if all the following conditions concur, viz.,--

"(a) that it appears to the State Government that the landholder, owing to his having entered upon a course of wasteful extravagance likely to dissipate his property, is incapable of managing or unfitted to manage his affairs;

(b) that the landholder belongs to a family of political or social importance; and

(c) that the State Government is satisfied that it is desirable, on grounds of public policy or general interest, to make such order."

5. Mr. Mela Ram has directed a two-pronged attack on the validity of this sub-section. He contends in the first place, that this section places unreasonable restrictions on the right of his client to acquire, hold and dispose of property and must, therefore, be deemed to be repugnant to the provisions of Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution; and secondly, that in so far as it seeks to take possession of property without either fixing the amount of compensation or specifying the principles on which and the manner in which compensation is to be determined and given, it is repugnant to the provisions of Article 31 of the Constitution.

6. A recent decision of the Supreme Court reported as -- Raghbir Singh v. Court of Wards, Ajmer. AIR 1953 SC 373 (A), has been cited in support of the proposition that the provisions of the impugned Act are repugnant to the provisions of Article 19 of the Constitution. The facts of this case were briefly as follows: On 18-9-1952 the Deputy Commissioner of Ajmer, who is the Court of Wards constituted under the Ajmer Government Wards Regulation, .1838, assumed superintendence of an istimrari estate belonging to the petitioner under Section 112 of the Ajmer Tenancy and Land Records Act, 1950, which is in