Mathur, C.J. -- 1. This is a reference made by the learned Single Judge on the ground that there is a conflict between the two Full Benches' judgments; therefore, the matter should be referred to Larger Bench.

2. At the very outset, we may mention that it is not correct to say that there is a conflict between the two Full Benches judgments of this Court, i.e. in 1985 JLJ 793 = 1985 MPLJ 675 (B. Johnson Bernard v. C.S. Naidu) and 1986 JLJ 23 = 1987 MPLJ 137 (Paraschand v. Hemant Kumar). B. Johnson Bernard (supra) is a judgment by the Division Bench and Paraschand (supra) is a judgment given by the Full Bench therefore, it is wrong to say that there was a conflict between two Full Benches' decisions. In B. Johnson Bernard's case (supra), the Amending Act No. 27/83 and Act No. 7/85 were challenged being ultra vires of Article 14 and 50 of the Constitution of India and their Lordships in B. Johnson Bernard's case (supra), held that both the provisions are intra vires and not ultra vires to the Articles 14 of the Constitution of India. It was observed in para 13 of the judgment as under:

"P. 13:-- Section 23-J specifies the categories of landlords, who alone are entitled to the benef