Parliament and State Legislatures can legislate on matters of incorporation, provided they adhere to constitutional powers.

[1] The petitioner was granted leave by this court on 9 August 2016, pursuant to art 4(4) of the Federal Constitution, to bring this Petition against the respondents. The petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

(i) a declaration that the Chief Minister of Penang (Incorporation) Enactment 2009 (Enactment 9) or alternatively ss 3, 4 and 5 of Enactment 9 is/are invalid and void as being a law which the State Legislature of the State of Penang has no power to make; and

(ii) a declaration that the Incorporation (State Legislatures Competency) Act 1962 (Act 380), or alternatively s 3 and item 5 of the First Schedule thereof, in so far as it allows the incorporation of the Office of the Chief Minister of Penang with perpetual succession and permits the corporation to engage in commercial activities is/are invalid and void as being a law which Parliament has no power to make.

Material Facts

[2] The petitioner was the registered owner of ten parcels of land in Balik Pulau, Mukim 6, South West District, Penang ("the lands").

[3] The lands were acquired by the Penang State Government (the 1st respondent) through the Director of Lands and Mines, Penang (the 3rd respondent) and the Land Administrator of the South West District of Penang (the 4th respondent). The lands were acquired for a public purpose under s 8 of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 (" LAA "), pursuant to a Declaration of Proposed Acquisition dated 27 August 2009 published in the Penang State Gazette.

[4] On 25 May 2010, the 4th respondent conducted an enquiry as required under s 12 of the LAA , and offered compensation in the sum of RM40,161,639.50 to the petitioner The petitioner accepted the said compensation under protest. On 27 October 2010, the 4th respondent took possession of the lands from the petitioner

[5] Thereafter, the petitioner applied to the 4th respondent to refer its objection as to the amount of compensation awarded to the High court, under s 38 of the LAA . The proceedings were registered in the Penang High court as Land Reference No: 15-122-2010.

[6] On 2 March 2011, the High court after hearing the parties ordered that the compensation sum be increased by RM4,803.195.50, with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from 27 October 2010 until full payment. Thus, the total sum of compensation awarded for the acquisition of the lands was RM44,964,837.00, which was paid in full to the petitioner.

[7] On 31 October 2013, the 4th respondent alienated the lands to the 5th respondent, a body corporate established under Enactment 9. The lands were alienated with the express condition that the lands were to be "used for educational purposes only".

[8] On 3 March 2014, the petitioner as the plaintiff filed Civil Suit No: 21NCVC-4-03-2014 in the Penang High court ("the Civil Suit"), naming the 1st, 3rd, 4th and 5th respondents as defendants. The petitioner challenged the validity of the acquisition and sought the return of the lands, alleging that the acquisition was done mala fide and not for a public purpose. The petitioner prayed, among others, for a declaration that the acquisition of the lands was invalid, null and void.

[9] The defendants in the civil suit have applied to strike out the same on the ground that the petitioner lacks locus standi by virtue of s 68 of the LAA . The proceedings in the civil suit are still ongoing before the High court.

[10] The petitioner took the position that the constitutionality of Act 380 and Enactment 9 cannot be dealt with by the Penang High court. Thus, the petitioner applied for leave to commence the present petition pursuant to arts 4(4) and 128(1)(a) of the Federal Constitution. The Government of Mal