9911796707
TMI Blog1951 (3) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertain lands appertaining to Cadastral Survey Plot NOS. 389, 390, 391 966 at Mouza Manirampur Thana Barrackpore in the District of 24 Parganas. The petnr. cultivates the said lands grows various kinds of vegetables thereon sells the same at the Sadar Bazar, Barrackpore the sale proceeds of these vegetables are alleged to be the only means of livelihood of the petnr. his family. The lands in question have been used for the last forty years for growing high class vegetables. The petnr. has also erected a building on the said lands consisting of six rooms out-of which four rooms are let out to tenants two rooms are occupied by the servants workmen of the petnr. In that land there is also a cow-shed where the petnr. has kept cattle for the purp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xpropriatory constitutes unreasonable interference imposes unreasonable unwarranted restrictions on the fundamental rights of the petnr. as citizen, of India to acquire, hold dispose of property carry on trade or business 4. It is pointed out that the right guaranteed by the Constitution under Article 19(1)(f) is entire complete but certain inroads cat be made to the extent provided in Clause (5) of Article 19. It is argued that Article 19 Article 31 of the Constitution should be read together. 5. Article 31 provides: (1) No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law. (2) No property movable or immovable including any interest in or in any Co. owned in, any commercial of industrial undertaking shall be taken possessio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iance with the Constitution. Mr. Kar further argues that if subsequently the Land Acquisition Act is repealed the provisions for compensation will be totally gone in consequence the present Act XXI [21] of 1948 will also be deprived of the benefit of the provisions of compensation contained in the Land Acquisition Act. 7. These arguments of Mr. Kar though ingenious are however without any substance. Legislation by incorporation is of common occurrence. The words so far as may be, apply in Section 8, West Bengal Act XXI [21] of 1948, are common words of legislation by incorporation, is an expression interchangeable with expressions mutatis mutandis as far as applicable like expressions. References may be made to the following Act to illustra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mity of the provisions, that the sections of the Land Acquisition Act are introduced into the subsequent Acts by employing incorporating words of legislation in the subsequent Acts. 11. The true interpretation of Section 8, West Bengal Act XXI [21] of 1948 is that all the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act have been incorporated in the Bengal Act save to the extent they are expressly varied or excepted by such Act. 12. The apprehension that the repeal of the Land Acquisition Act in future will have the effect of depriving the Bengal Act of all provisions as to compensation is absolutely baseless. It is a well settled provision of law that the repeal of a statute does not repeal such portions of the statute as have been incorporated into ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ct. to go into the question I hold in view of the observation of the Chief Justice in Nalini Mohan v. Dt. Magistrate of Malda, AIR 1951 Cal 346, that acquisition of land for settlement of refugees is acquisition for a public purpose is within the competence of the Govt. of the State of West Bengal. The learned Chief Justice observed (p. 301) of course it could make provision for the rehabilitation of refugees from foreign countries, although in construing the words of the particular ordinance before him he came to the conclusion that the wordings of the particular Ordinance did not justify the Govt. in acquiring land for rehabilitation of a refugee driven out from Pakistan by reason of communal strife political tension. Apart from that I f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not arise. The contents subject-matters of Articles 19 31 are not the same they proceed to deal with the rights covered by their respective words from totally different angles. Article 19 should be read as a separate complete Article. The judgment of Das J. at p. 113 also makes the position quite clear. This view of the reading of Article 19 is reaffirmed in the subsequent case of Charanjit Lal v. Union of India, [1950] 1 SCR 869 the subsequent paras, also in a decision of this Ct. reported in 87 Cal. L. J. 140 by Harries C. J. Banerjee J. (Sudhindra Nath v. Sailendra Nath). 17. It was also argued by Mr Kar that the Notfn. No. 3644 dated 4-4-1950 is illegal bad as it is not made in accordance with the provisions of West Bengal Act XXI [21] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
