http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8  

PETITIONER: FIDA ALI AND OTHERS

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

DATE OF JUDGMENT30/04/1974

BENCH: GOSWAMI, P.K. BENCH: GOSWAMI, P.K. MATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN ALAGIRISWAMI, A. SARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH

CITATION:  1974 AIR 1522            1975 SCR  (1) 340  1974 SCC  (2) 253  CITATOR INFO :  RF         1975 SC1193  (27)  E          1990 SC1771  (12)

ACT: Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act, 1972-Whether the Act is protected by Art. 31A of the Constitution.

HEADNOTE: In  this Writ petition, the constitutional validity  of  the Jammu  and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act. 1972 and the  rules framed  thereunder has been challenged.  The short  question for determination is whether the Act is protected under Art. 31A of the Constitution as applicable to the State of  Jammu and Kashmir, providing for a scheme of agrarian reforms. According  to  the petitioners, who are  landowners  in  the State of Jammu and Kashmir, they have been rendered landless by  the  Act.   They  further  allege  that  ,the   proposed compensation  is illusory and the exclusion of an  "Orchard" from the definition of land is motivated and that the Act is not  a piece of legislation bearing on agrarian  reform  and therefore.   it  is  not  protected  by  Art.  31A  of   the ,Constitution. Dismissing the petition, HELD :-(1) From the provisions of the Act, it is clear  that the  Act contains a programme of agrarian reforms in  taking stock  of  the land in the State which is  not  in  personal cultivation  and which though in personal cultivation is  in excess of the ceiling area of 121 acres.  The main focus  of the Act is to See that the tillers, who form the backbone of the  agricultural economy, are provided with ,land  for  the purpose  of  personal  cultivation subject  to  the  ceiling provision.          [345H-346B] The Act makes effective provisions for creating a granary of land at the disposal of the State for equitable distribution subject  to the limit, amongst the tillers of the  soil  and even the owners who would make ’personal cultivation’ of the same within the meaning of the Act. [346B-C] (2)In  the  present case, there is  no  discrimination  in favour  of the orchard owners because in fixing the  ceiling

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 8  

areas.   land  and  orchards  are  both  included  and   the definitions  of ’land’ and ’orchard’ under the  Act  clearly permit  of  ,some special treatment to orchards in  view  of scheme  of  the entire Act.  Further. there  is  reason  for excluding  ’orchards’ which is a compact area  having  fruit trees,  grown thereon in such number that they  preclude  it from  ’being  used  for  any  other  agricultural   purpose. Further,  orchards have special significance in  the  State. Therefore, there is no discrimination; and since the Act has been passed with the definite object of agrarian reforms, it cannot be successfully challenged on the ground of violation of Art. 14; 19 and Art. 31 of the Constitution. [346D-347C]

JUDGMENT: ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition No. 1485 of 1973. Under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India. M.   C.  Chitale,  Naunit  Lal and  Lalita  Kohli,  for  the petitioners. M.   K Ramamurthy and Fineet Kumar, for the respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GOSWAMI,  J. This writ application under Article 32  of  the Constitution  raises  the  question  of  the  constitutional tradition  of  the Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian  Reforms  Act, 1972 (Act of XXXVI of 1972), 341 briefly  called  the Act, and the rules  framed  thereunder. The  petitioners are land-owners in the State of  Jammu  and Kashmir and their grievance  is that by the impugned  Act they  along with a large number of similar land-owners  have been  rendered landless.               They  further  allege that  the  amount  intended to be paid  as  compensation  is illusory  and  the  Act is,  therefore,  of  a  confiscatory nature.   They  also allege that exclusion of  an  ’orchard’ from the definition of ’land’ under section 2(4) of the  Act is motivated and designed in the interests of highly  placed influential persons in the State who own such orchards.   By taking an additional ground, they also aver that the Act  is not   saved  by  the  provisions  of  Article  31A  of   the Constitution as applicable to the State of Jammu and Kashmir since  it is not a piece of legislation bearing on  agrarian reform. The  respondent  has denied that above averments  and  other allegations  in  the  petition  by  means  of  an  affidavit affirmed by the Special Revenue Secretary to the  Government of  Jammu  and  Kashmir.   It is claimed  that  the  Act  is protected by Article 31A of the Constitution and  is  immune from challenge on the ground of violation of Articles 14, 19 and 31 of the Constitution.  According to the respondent the Act  is passed in order to ensure better production avoiding concentration  of means of production in the hands of a  few and  to annihilate the exploitation of the peasantry.   With regard to the objection regarding compensation, it is stated that the minimum rate of compensation has been fixed and the same  is  not  illusory.   It is  further  stated  that  the Government  is in the process of framing rules for the  mode of paying compensation and the instalments of payment of the compensation would certainly be reasonable. The short question that arises for consideration is  whether the  Act is protected under Article 31A of the  Constitution as  applicable to the State of Jammu and Kashmir  providing, as  claimed by the State, for a scheme of agrarian  reforms. If  the answer is in the affirmative, all  objections  under Articles  14,  19 and 31 would be of no avail.   This  legal

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 8  

position  is  conceded  by  the  learned  counsel  for   the petitioners and indeed is well-settled by several  decisions of  this  Court  (See Kavalappara  Kottarathit  Kochuni  and Others  v. The State of Madras and Others,(2)  Ranjit  Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others;(2) State of  Uttar Pradesh v. Raja Anand Brahma Shah;(3) The Kannan Devan Hills Produce v. The State of Kerala and Another;(4) and State  of Kerala and Another v. The Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg. (Wvg.) Co. Ltd. etc.).(5) We may now, therefore, turn to the Act to determine  whether the  impugned  legislation  can come  under  the  canopy  of protection  of  Article 31A of the  Constitution.   The  Act itself  carries  the appellation  "Agrarian  Reforms  Act.". These words, themselves, may not be decisive in the  absence of provisions in the Act disclosing a genuine (1) [1960] (3) S.C.R. 887    (2) [1965] (1) S.C.R. 82 (3) [1967] (1) S.C.R. 362   (4) [1972](2) S.C.C. 218 (5)  AIR [1973] S.C.C. 2734 342 scheme of agrarian reform. , We will, therefore, examine the material provisions of the Act with that end in view.  It  is  apparent  from  section 51  of  the  Act  that  the legislature  had  earlier passed The Jammu and  Kashmir  Big Landed  Estates Abolition Act, 2007; The Jammu  and  Kashmir Tenancy  Act, 1980; The Jammu and Kashmir Tenancy  (Stay  of Ejectment Proceedings) Act, 1966; The Jammu and Kashmir Land Revenue Act, 1996 and The Jammu and Kashmir Consolidation of Holdings  Act, 1962.  By section 51 the provisions of  these Acts in so far as they are inconsistent with the  provisions of  the  present  Act shall cease to apply  subject  to  the provisos  appended to the Section.  The  State  Legislature, therefore,  did  not start on a clean  slate.   Indeed,  the petitioners,  curiously  enough, make a grievance  that  the State of Jammu and Kashmir was the "first State in the whole of  India  which  enacted drastic laws  detrimental  to  the interests  of  land-owners right from the year  1948".   The petitioners  seem  to  attribute  even  oblique  motive   in enacting  the Act to which we shall revert hereafter at  the appropriate place. Coming back to the provisions of the Act, the preamble shows that  the Act has to provide for  comprehensive  legislation relating to land reforms in the State of Jammu and  Kashmir. The Act, although it received the assent of the Governor  on November  27, 1972, was brought into force on the first  day of  May,  1973.   Section 2 contains  the  definitions.   By section  2(2)  ’ceiling area’ means the extent  of  land  or orchards or both measuring twelve and a half standard acres. By  section 2(4) " ’land’ means land which is  occupied,  or has  been  let, for agricultural purposes  or  for  purposes subservient to agriculture, or for pasture, and includes- (a)  structures  on  such land used for  purposes  connected with agriculture;               (b)   trees standing on such land;               (c)   areas  covered  by, or  fields  floating               over, water; and               (d)   forest lands and wooded wastes;               but does not include-               (i)   the  sites  of buildings in  a  town  or               village Abadi or any land appurtenant to  such               building or site;               (ii)any  land  which was an orchard  on  the               first day of September, 1971; and               (iii)any  land in respect of  which  specific               provision has been made in Chapter 111". , By  section  2(5) "’orchard’ means a compact  area  of  land

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 8  

having  fruit trees grown thereon or devoted to  cultivation of  fruit trees in such number that they preclude,  or  when fully  grown would preclude, such land from being  used  for any other agricultural purpose". Chapter  II provides for various restrictions on  rights  in land.  Section 3 with which it opens runs as follows 343               "Vesting in the State of rights of owners  and               intermediaries  in land not held  in  personal               cultivation.-Notwithstanding          anything               contained  in  any law for the time  being  in               force,  the right of ownership of  any  person               and the right of any intermediary in land  not               held by him in his personal cultivation on the               first day of September, 1971, shall extinguish               and  shall vest in the State with effect  from               the appointed date               Provided  that nothing in this  section  shall               affect  the  right  of  a,  mortgagee  without               possession, if any, on the land".                The other relevant sections in Chapter 11 are               as follows :-               Section  4.  "Vesting  of land  in  excess  of               ceiling  area  in  the  State.-Notwithstanding               anything  contained  in any law for  the  time               being in force-               (a)   Where    any   land,   including    that               retainable  under  section  53,  ,held  by  an               individual in his personal cultivation whether               as  owner or as tenant or otherwise is,  along               with  orchards owned by him, in excess of  the               ceiling  area  on the 1st  day  of  September,               1971, the excess land shall vest in the  State               with effect from the appointed date subject to               the  right of a mortgagee without  possession,               if any, on the land;               (b)   Where  aggregate  land,  including  that               retainable  under  section  53,  held  by  the                             members   of  a  family,  whether  joi ntly   or               severally or both, in their personal  cultiva-               tion  as  owners or as tenants  or  otherwise,               along  with  orchards  owned by  them,  is  in               excess  of the ceiling area on the 1st day  of               September, 1971, the excess land shall vest in               the State with effect from the appointed date,               subject  to  the rights of  mortgagee  without               possession, if any, on the land : Provided  that each such individual or each such  member  of the  family,  as the case may be, shall have the  option  of selecting, in the prescribed manner, the land he desires  to retain with himself within the limits provided- for in  sub- section (1) of section 12 : Provided  further that no land in a demarcated forest  shall be so selected."               Section  5.  "Vesting of ownership  rights  in               land  held in personal  cultivation.-The  land               vested  in  the State under  section  3  shall               subject to the provisions of section 4 and  to               the  rights  of mortgagee  without  possession               thereon,  if any, and on payment of such  levy               in   full  as  may  be  prescribed,  vest   in               ownership  rights in the person  holding  such               land in personal cultivation on the first  day               of September, 1971 or in the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 8  

L177Sup.CI/75 344               person   claiming   through   him,    anything               contained  in  any law for the time  being  in               force notwithstanding."               Section, 6. "Payments in lieu of acquisition.-               All  lands  and rights therein taken  away  or               abridged  by  sections  3, 4 and  8  shall  be               deemed to have been acquired by the State with               effect  from the date such land or rights  are               vested  in  the  State  and  payment  in  lieu               thereof shall be determined in accordance with               the rules made under this Act".               x x x x x x Section 7.               "Resumption.-Notwithstanding anything contain-               ed  in  section 3, any  person  whose  monthly               income  does  not exceed Rs. 500.00P  and  who               was,  on the first day of September, 1971,  an               inhabitant  of  the  area to  which  this  Act               applies  and was an owner of land not held  by                             him  in his personal cultivation may resume  a               unit  of  land not  exceeding  three  standard               acres  for personal cultivation and  for  that               purpose apply to the prescribed authority,  in               the prescribed manner, within a period of  one               hundred  and  eighty days from  the  appointed               date.  The prescribed authority shall not hold               an   enquiry  into  the  application  in   the               prescribed manner and pass appropriate  orders               thereon We  need not quote the six provisos and the  explanation  to the  section.  We may emphasis that section 7  appropriately provides an incentive to personal cultivation by  resumption of  land on pain of extinguishment of the rights on  failure to bring the land resumed under personal cultivation within a specified period.               Section    8.  "Consequences  of  failure   to               bring    resumed    land    under     personal               cultivation.-               (1)   Any  owner who has resumed land  or  for               whom land has been resumed and who has entered               into possession thereof under section 7, shall               bring such land under his personal cultivation               within a period of eight months from the  date               of  entry into possession, failing  which  his               rights in such land shall, subject to the pro-               visions of sub section (2) extinguish.               (2)   If   the  prescribed   authority   after               holding  an enquiry in the  prescribed  manner               finds  that the owner has failed to bring  the               land under his personal cultivation within the               period  mentioned in sub-section (1) it  shall               declare all rights, title and interests of the               owner  in such land to have  extinguished  and               all  rights, title and interest in  such  land               shall vest in the State subject to the  rights               of a mortgagee without possession thereof,  if               any,  and  such land shall be disposed  of  in               accordance with section 10".               345               Section 10.  "Disposal of surplus  land.-Where               any land, vested in the State under this  Act,               becomes  surplus,  the  Government  shall.  be               competent to dispose it of in consideration of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 8  

             such  levy  and  subject  to  such  terms  and               conditions and in such manner As may be  pres-               cribed, anything contained in any law for  the               time being in force notwithstanding". Section 11 provides for restriction on future  acquisitions, tenancies and transfers.  Section 12 deals with land held in excess  of  ceiling.  Section 13 provides  for  disposal  of excess land acquired under section 12.  Section  15  provides for prohibition  on  transfer  of land.  Chapter III deals with evacuees’ lands with which  we are not concerned. Chapter  :IV deals with orchards.  By section 25 there is  a levy of annual tax in respect of such portion of an  orchard as is, on the commencement of this Act or shall at any  time thereafter  be,  in  excess of 12  1/2  standard  acres.   A machinery is provided under the Act for collection of  taxes and appointment of Assessing Officers in accordance with the prescribed  rules.  Thus although orchards on the  specified date, unlike land, do not vest in the State, the excess area suffers  a  levy  of annual tax.   The  very  definition  of orchard  permits  this  special treatment in  ’the  case  of orchards in excess of the ceiling area. Chapter V deals with jurisdiction and procedure and, Chapter VI provides for penalties. Section  46 provides for excluding certain  specified  lands from operation of the Act.  By section 47 the provisions  of this  Act shall have an overriding effect on other  laws  or any  custom or usage or contract, etc.  By section 48  power is  reserved  to  the  Government  to  issue   instructions. Section  49  provides  for  a  summary  procedure  for   all proceedings  and  enquiries  under the  Act  or  the  rules. Section  50  provides for the rule making  power.   We  have already noticed section 51.  By section 52 all applications, suits  and proceedings pending before any  Revenue  Officer, Civil  or  Revenue Court, etc. shall abate  subject  to  the proviso  appended to the section.  By section 54,  which  is the  last section, transfers of lands or orchards to  defeat the provisions of the Act shall not be recognised and  shall be  deemed  to  be owned by such  persons  for  purposes  of calculating the area retainable under the Act by them. The golden web, throughout the warp and woof of the Act,  is the  feature  of  personal cultivation  of  the  land.   The expression   ’personal  cultivation’  which   runs   through sections  3,4,5,7 and 8 is defined with care  under  section 2(7)   in  a  detailed  manner  with  a  proviso   and   six explanations. From a review of the foregoing provisions it is obvious that the  Act contains a clear programme of agrarian  reforms  in taking  stock  of  the land in the State  which  is  not  in personal cultivation (section 3) 346 and which though in personal cultivation is in excess of the ceiling area (section 4).  A ceiling area is fixed for  land or orchards or both measuring 12 1/2 standard acres.   After the  land  vests  in  the  State,  in  accordance  with  the provisions  of the Act, a provision is made for disposal  of the surplus land in accordance with the rules. The  main focus of the Act is to see that the  tillers,  who form the back-bone of the agricultural economy, are provided with land for the purpose of personal cultivation subject to the  ceiling  provision even in their case.  The  Act  makes effective  provisions for creating a granary of land at  the disposal of the State for equitable distribution, subject to the  limit,  amongst the tillers of the soil  and  even  the owners  who  would make ’personal cultivation’ of  the  same

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 8  

within  the meaning of the Act.  In the nature of things  it is imperative that a ceiling area has to be fixed and  those who have so far enjoyed land in large tracts mostly  without personally, cultivating the same, are required to share with others who have no land of their own but are genuine tillers of  the soil.  Even so, no one is allowed to own  more  than the ceiling area. In fixing the ceiling area again land and orchards are  both included. We do not see any justification for the comment, adverted to above,  that  there is any discrimination in favour  of  the orchard-owners in not including land which was an orchard on the  first day of September, 1971 within the  definition  of land  under the Act since ,orchard’ is reckoned  along  with the  ’land’ for the purpose of determination of the  ceiling area  under the Act.  Further Chapter IV deals  specifically with  orchards and under section 25 a levy of annual tax  is imposed  even  in the case of orchards in excess of  12  1/2 standard  acres.  The respective definitions of  ’land’  and ’orchard’  under  the  Act clearly permit  of  some  special treatment  to orchards in view of the scheme of  the  entire Act.   Since hand under the Act has an intimate  nexus  with purposes  subservient  to agriculture or pasture,  there  is reason  for  excluding  ’orchard’ which is  a  compact  area having  fruit trees grown thereon in such number  that  they preclude  it  from  being used for  any  other  agricultural purpose.  It is common knowledge that orchards have  special significance  in the State with which we are concerned.   We also  do not fail to notice that under section 4(2)  of  the Big  Landed  Estates Abolition Act (Act 17  of  2007)  (1950 A.D.)  extinction  of the right of ownership  under  section 4(1)  of that Act bad not been made applicable to  orchards. No motive can be attributed to the legislature in the choice of  legislation within its constitutional  competence.   We, therefore, do not find any merit whatsoever in the objection on  the score of motive, or that there is  any  unreasonable discrimination in favour of the orchard-owners as such. On  the  other hand, the predominant object  underlying  the provisions of the Act is agrarian reforms.  Agrarian reforms naturally  cannot  take  the  same  pattern  throughout  the country.  Besides the availability of land for the  purpose, limited in scope in the nature of 347 things, the scheme has to fit in with the local  conditions, variability  of climate, rain-fall, peculiarity of  terrain, suitability  and  profitability of multiple  crop  patterns, vulnerability  to  floods  and  so  many  other  factors  in formulating  a  scheme  of agrarian reforms  suitable  to  a particular State.  While a modest beginning is made with the land at disposal, modern methods of mechanisation and  other improvements  can be resorted to with the help of the  State machinery  available  to  the tillers  of  the  soil.   Such details can be worked out gradually by various processes  in the  course of implementation of the provisions of  the  Act and   the   rules  which   definitely   provide   sufficient elasticity.   We  are of opinion that the impugned  Act  has been passed with the definite object of agrarian reforms and cannot be successfully challenged on the score of  violation of  Article  14, Article 19 and Article 31 in  view  of  the provisions  of  Article 31A.   The  application,  therefore, fails and is dismissed.  The parties will pay and bear their own costs.   S.C.                          Petition  dismissed. 348

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 8