1990 (8) TMI 100 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Procedure for reference of matters to a Full Bench by learned single judges.
- Validity of provisions of the Esso Acquisition Act, Burmah Shell Acquisition Act, and Caltex Acquisition Act under articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution.
- Interpretation of sections 5(2) and 7(3) of the three enactments.
- Application of article 31C to protect the Acts.
- Clarification on perpetual lease under section 5(2).
- Applicability of articles 14 and 19 in light of article 31C.
- Dismissal of the second appeal.

Analysis:
The judgment involves a second appeal admitted by a learned single judge, who referred the matter to a larger Bench without providing reasons, leading to a reconsideration of the decision in Mustafa Hussain v. Union of India. The procedure for referring matters to a Full Bench by single judges is outlined, emphasizing the requirement to first refer the matter to a Division Bench for consideration. The Division Bench in Mustafa Hussain case upheld the validity of the Esso Acquisition Act, Burmah Shell Acquisition Act, and Caltex Acquisition Act under articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution, citing the necessity of sections 5(2) and 7(3) to fulfill State Policy objectives under article 39(b) and (c).

Specifically, the Division Bench clarified that the provisions do not allow for perpetual lease but rather a one-time option under existing terms. The judgment confirms that article 31C protects the Acts, rendering articles 14 and 19 inapplicable to aid the appellant's case. Consequently, the validity of section 5(1) and (2) of the Burmah Shell Act was not revisited, and no other points were raised in the second appeal, leading to its dismissal without costs. The judgment highlights the significance of adhering to procedural rules for reference to Full Bench and the application of constitutional provisions in upholding legislative enactments.

This comprehensive analysis delves into the procedural aspects, constitutional interpretation, and specific provisions of the Acts in question, providing a detailed overview of the judgment's key findings and the reasons behind the dismissal of the second appeal.