http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 24  

PETITIONER: STATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THE GWALIOR RAYON SILK MANUFACTURING (WVG.) CO. LTD.  ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT18/09/1973

BENCH: PALEKAR, D.G. BENCH: PALEKAR, D.G. SIKRI, S.M. (CJ) CHANDRACHUD, Y.V. BHAGWATI, P.N. KRISHNAIYER, V.R.

CITATION:  1973 AIR 2734            1974 SCR  (1) 671  1973 SCC  (2) 713  CITATOR INFO :  F          1974 SC1522  (3)  RF         1975 SC1193  (20)  RF         1976 SC2237  (21)  D          1977 SC 121  (10,11)  RF         1977 SC 915  (36)  R          1978 SC 803  (33)  R          1979 SC 621  (28,29)  F          1980 SC1285  (12,27,31,44,45)  RF         1980 SC1762  (5,6)  E          1981 SC 234  (100)  RF         1989 SC1485  (12)  D          1990 SC 123  (37)  E          1990 SC1747  (11)  RF         1992 SC 248  (52)

ACT: Constitution  of India, 1950-Article 31A-The Kerala  Private Forests  (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971-Act if  entitled to  the  protection of article 31A-Private  forest  held  in Janman  right-If  necessary to show  they  are  agricultural lands  within  sub.  clause (iii)  of  article  31A-Agrarian Reform, meaning.

HEADNOTE: The  Kerala Private Forests (Vesting & Assignment) Act  (Act 26 of 1971) purported to acquire forest lands held on Janman right,  without payment of compensation, for implementing  a scheme of agrarian reform by assigning lands on registry  or by  way  of  lease  to the  poorer  sections  of  the  rural agricultural  population.  A full bench of the  Kerala  High Court  (Reported  in A.I.R. 1973, Kerala 63) held  that  the provisions of the Act were not protected by article 31-A  of the   Constitution   and  accordingly   declared   the   Act unconstitutional  and void.  The High Court  concluded  that forest  lands in the State of Kerala could not generally  be regarded as agricultural lands and, therefore, could not  be the  subject  of  agrarian reform and  that  the  scheme  of agrarian reform envisaged by the Act was not real or genuine but only illusory.  The appeals and the petitions  concerned

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 24  

the   question  whether  the  Act  could  qualify  for   the protection  of article 31A(1) of the Constitution.   It  was contended  on  behalf of the State of Kerala  that  what  is included  in  the expression ’estate’ is specified  in  sub. clauses  (i),  (ii) and (iii) of clause (2) of  article  31A and,  since  the  sub-clauses are disjunctive  it  would  be enough  for the State to show that the law related  to  land covered by an " estate" falling in at least one of the  sub- clauses,  that  since private forests were  held  in  janman right  they would be an ’estate’ within the meaning of  sub- clause  (i)  and  that if the law  envisaged  a  measure  of agrarian  reform  it  was not necessary  for  the  State  to establish additionally that forest lands were similar  lands described  in sub-clause (iii), that is to say,  lands  held for  purposes  of  agriculture  or  for  purposes  ancillary thereto. The petitioners contended that private forests could not  be converted into agricultural lands by a mere legislative flat contained in the Preamble of the Act, because, forest  lands are lands in which forests grow spontaneously and  naturally without  human effort or skill and are quite  distinct  from agricultural lands which, however defined, must contain  the element of tilling the soil for sowing and planting.  It was pointed out that in sub-clause (iii) of Article 31A (2)  (a) a  forest land may be regarded as an agricultural land  only when that land is held or let for purposes of agriculture or for purposes ancillary thereto.  Assuming that forest  lands were   ’estate’  within  the  definition,  it  was   further contended  that their acquisition was not  for  implementing any scheme of agrarian reform, but for a collateral purpose’ namely,  to increase the revenue of the State by  exploiting the forest wealth. Allowing the appeals and dismissing the petitions, HELD  : that the Act was protected by Article 31A(1) of  the Constitution. (1)The forest lands in the State of Kerala have attained a peculiar character owing to their geography and climate  and the  evidence  available  shows that  vast  areas  of  these forests are still capable of supporting a large agricultural population.   They are agricultural lands in the sense  that they  can be prudently and profitably exploited  for  nature stated  in  the Preamble that the private merely  wanted  to convey  that they are prudently and profitably exploited  3- 392SCI/74 agricultural lands in the senses.  It is  manifest that when the legislature are agricultural land, they  lands which  by  and large could be prudently and  profitably  for agricultural purposes.          [682H, 683C] 672 V.Venugopala  Varma Rajaa v. Controller of  Estate  Duty, Kerala [1969] K.L.T. 320, relied on. (ii)The  private  forests being held in Janmam  right,  and Janman  right being an ’estate"are liable to be acquired  by the State under article 31A(1)(a) as a necessary step in the implementation  of  agrarian reform.  Section 3 of  the  im- pugned Act vests the ownership and possession of all private forests  in  the State.  Therefore, they would  attract  the protection  of article 31A(1).  It would not be, in  such  a case, necessary to further examine if the lands so vested in the  government are agricultural lands failing  within  sub- clause (iii).       [684C] Kavalappara  Kottarathil Kochuni and others v. The State  of Madras  and  others, [1960] 3 S.C.R. 887, State of  U.P.  v. Raja  Anand Brahma Shah, [1967] 1 S.C.R. 362  and  Balmadies Plantations  Ltd.  v. State of Tamil Nadu, [1972]  2  S.C.C. 133, referred to.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 24  

(iii)The Act envisages a scheme of agrarian reform.  In statutes of this nature provision can only be generally made to  indicate  the broad details of the scheme  for  agrarian reform and that is what is done in the Act.  The High Court, has  not  given any substantial reasons for  coming  to  the conclusion that the scheme of agrarian reform is a  "teasing illusion and a promise in unreality". [684F, 685C] Balmadies Plantations Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu, [1972]  2 S.C.C. 133 distinguished. Kannan  Devan  Hills  Produce v. The  State  of  Kerala  and another, [1972] 2 S.C.C. 218, applied. (iv)The  Act  cannot be impugned as a  piece  of  colorable legislation.  The question really is, in the first place, of the  competence of the legislature to pass the impugned  Act and, in the second, whether the Act is constitutional in the sense that it is protected by article 31A(1). [687D] (v)It is presumed that the legislature knows the needs  of its  people and will balance the present advantages  against possible future disadvantages.  If there is pressure on land and  the legislature feels that forest lands in  some  areas can  be  conveniently,  and  without  much  damage  to   the community  as  a  whole,  utilized  for  settling  a   large proportion  of the agricultural population, it is  perfectly open,   under  the  constitutional  powers  vested  in   the legislature,  to  make  a suitable law; and if  the  law  is constitutionally valid this Court can hardly strike it  down on  the ground that in the long run the legislation  instead of  turning  out to be a boon will turn out to be  a  curse. [687G] (vi)An   agreement  of  the  Government   cannot   preclude legislation  on  the subject.  The High  Court  has  rightly pointed  out  that  surrender  by  the  Government  of   its legislative  powers to be used for public good cannot  avail the  company or operate against the Government as  equitable estoppel. [688C] Per  Bhagwati  &  Krishna  Iyer  JJ  :  (Concurring)  :  The technology of agrarian reform for a developing country which traditionally  lives in its villages envisages the  national programmes of transmuting rural life from feudal medivealism into  equal,  affluent modernism a wide  canvas  overflowing mere  improvement  of  agriculture and reform  of  the  land system.   Article 31A(2)(iii) itself, by referring  to  land for  pasture  and sites of buildings  and  other  structures occupied by cultivators, agricultural labourers and  village artisans,  gives  clear hints of  agrarian  wellbeing  being pivotal to land reform in its larger legitimate connotation. Agrarian reform is more humanist than mere land reform  and, scientifically  viewed,  covers  not  merely  abolition   of intermediary  tenures,  zamindaris  and  the  like  but  re- structuring  of  village  life itself taking  in  its  broad embrace   the  socio-economic  regeneration  of  the   rural population.  The Indian Constitution is a social  instrument with  an  economic mission and the sense and  sweep  of  its provisions  must be, gathered by judicial statesmen on  that seminal footing.  Also, ’it is arguable that the elimiantion of ancient janamam may per se be regarded as possessing  the attribute  of agrarian reform, because, to wipe  out  feudal vestiges  from  our  countryside  and  to  streamline   land ownership are preliminaries to the projection of a socialis- tic  order  which Part IV and art. 31A of  the  Constitution strive  to  create.   However, this Court has  held  that  a scheme of agrarian reform is essential, apart from  673 taking over of fanmam rights to, make the law valid.  In the present  case  a concrete agrarian project is  presented  by

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 24  

section  10  of the Forest Act.  Once it  is  accepted  that developmental orientation and distributive justice are  part of  and inspire activist by agrarian reform, its  sweep  and reach  must  extend  to  cover  the  needs  of  the  village community as well. What programme of agrarian reform should be initiated to satisfy the requirement of rural uplift in a particular community under the prevailing circumstances is a matter  for  legislative judgment.  The sole issue  for  the Court is whether it is in fact a scheme of agrarian  reform, and  if it is, the prudence or folly thereof  falls  outside the  orbit of judicial review.  In ascertaining whether  the impugned enactment outlines a blue-print for agrarian reform the  Court  will  look to the  substance  of  the  statutory proposal and not its mere outward form.  The.  Court  should not  be too gullible to accept a scheme of  agrarian  reform when it is nothing but a verbal subterfuge, but at the  same time  the  Court should not be too astute to reject  such  a scheme  because it is not satisfied with the wisdom  of  the scheme  or its technical soundness.  It would not be  enough merely to say that the income of the property acquired is to be  utilised for purpose of agrarian reform.   The  property itself  must  be acquired for carrying out  such  a  reform. This  requirement is satisfied in the present case.  If  the State, for ulterior ends, prevaricates or betrays the scheme by  non-implementation or mis-implementation,  an  aggrieved party may seek releif through a judicial post audit. [692 G, 693 C, E] Once it is found that the legislative area is barricaded  by Art.  31A it cannot be breached by Arts. 14, 19 and  31  and judicial break-in is constitutionally interdicted.  But,  at the same time, Art. 31A is no charter of legislative freedom to refuse compensation altogether in every case.  The  Court may   not   strike  down  a  statute  for   non-payment   of compensation  but  the legislature is  expected,  except  in exceptional socio-historical setting to provide just payment for the deprived persons.  To exclude judicial review is not to black out the beneficient provisions of Arts. 14, 19  and 31.   May be the present legislation dealing with  extensive antiquated   janmam  rights  relates  to   the   exceptional category.   However this is an area where not the court  but the elector is the proper corrective instrument. [695G] Kochuni’s  case, [1960].3 S.C.R. 887, Ranjit  Singh’s  case, [1965] 1 S.C.R. 82; 94, Ram Narain Medhi v. State of Bombay, [1959]  Supp.   1 S.C.R. 489, Raja Anand’s  case,  [1967]  1 S.C.R.  362,  Balmadies Plantations Ltd. v. State  of  Tamil Nadu, [1972] 2 S.C.C. 133, Kanan Devan Hills Produce v.  The State of Kerala and another, [1972] 2 S.C.C. 218,  Gajapathi Narayan Deo v. State of Orissa, [1954] S.C.R. 1, 10-11, and Wakf  Estates  v.  State of Madras,  [1971]  2  S.C.R.  790, referred to.

JUDGMENT: CIVIL  APPELLATE/ORIGINAL  JURISDICTION : Civil  Appeal  No. 1938 of 1972. Appeal  from  the judgment and order dated  the  21st  June, 1972, ,,if the Kerala High Court at Emakulam in  O.P.  No. 3771 of 1971.                Civil Appeal No. 1416 of 1972. Appeal from the judgment and order dated the 21st June, 1972 of  the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam in O.P. No.  3858  of 1971.              Civil Appeal       No. 1417 of 1972 Appeal  from  the judgment and order dated the  21st  June,,

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 24  

1972 of the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam in O.P. No.  4036 of 1971 and Writ Petition Nos. 151, 152, 153, 176, 177, 178. 179, 180, 181, 182, 186, 187, 188, 189, & 198 of 1971. Under  Art.  32  of  the  constitution  of  India  for   the enforcement of fundamental rights. 674 M.M. Abdul Kader, V. A. Seyid Muhammad and P. C.  Chandi, for the appellants, (in all appeals). V.K.  Krishnan  Menon,  B. Mohan  and  O.P.  Khaitan  for respondent (in C.A. No. 1398/72). M.C. Chagla, (in C.A. 1417 only) T. K. M. Unnithan and A. S. Nambiar, for respondents (in C.A. Nos. 1416-1417). B.Dutta  and  J. B. Dadachani, for  petitioners  (in  all W.Ps. except W.P. 186/71).  N.  Sudhakaran  and P. K. Pillai, for petitioner  (in  W.P. 186/71). M.   M.  Abdul  Kader,  Sukumaran and K.  M.  K.  Nair,  for respondent No. 1 (in all the W.Ps). R.N.  Sachthey, for respondent No. 2 (in all W.Ps  except W.P. 186/71). The  Judgment  of  A. N. RAY C.J. D. G. PALEKAR  and  Y.  V. CHANDRACHUD, JJ. was delivered by PALEKAR, J. KRISHNA  IYER, J.  gave a separate Opinion on behalf of himself and  P.  N. BHAGWATI, J. PALEKAR,J  All the above cases involve a challenged  to  the Kerala  Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act  26  of 1971 (hereinafter called the Act) on the ground that the Act as  a whole was violative of Articles 14, 19(1) (f) (g)  and 31 of the Constitution. The lands involved are private forest lands situated in  the former   Malabar  District  which,  after  the  States   Re- organization Act, 1956, stood transferred from the old State of  Madras to the new State of Kerala.  As a result  of  the Act referred to above, these forest lands vest in the State, allegedly, as a measure of agrarian reform. The Writ Petitions are filed in this Court under Article  32 of  the  Constitution by several Owners  and/or  lessees  of large tracts of forest lands.  The Civil, Appeals are  filed by  the  State, of Kerala from the judgment and order  of  a full  bench  of the Kerala High Court  (Reported  in  A.I.R. 1973,   Kerala  36)  in  petitions  filed  in   that   court challenging   the  Act.   The  High  Court  held  that   the provisions  of the Act are not protected by Article  31A  of the  Constitution  and  accordingly  declared  the  Act   as constitutional  and void.  Thus in all the  proceedings  now before us, which were argued together, the question involved is the validity of the Act.  That will depend entirely  the’ question  whether the Act is protected by Article 31A(1)  of the Constitution. The  conclusion  of  the High Court  was  expressed  in  the following words:               "Having regard to our conclusions that  forest               lands in the State of Kerala, cannot generally               be   regarded  as  agricultural   lands   and,               therefore,  cannot be the subject of  agrarian               reform and that the scheme of agrarian reform                675               envisaged  by the impugned Act is not real  or               genuine  but  only  illusory, we  are  of  the               opinion that the provisions of the Act are not               protected by Article 31A of the  Constitution.               We   therefore  declare  the  Kerala   Private               Forests  (Vesting  and Assignment) Act  26  of               1971 unconstitutional and void." It  is  contended on behalf of the State of Kerala  that  in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 24  

order  to get the protection of Article, 3 1A(1) (a) of  the Constitution  that the law must fulfill  two  conditions-(1) that  it  must  relate to an estate as  defined  in  Article 31A(2)  (a)  and (2) that the law-must be  one  of  agrarian reform.   What  is included in the  expression  "estate"  is specified  in sub-clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) of clause  (2) of  Article 31A and, since the sub-clauses are  disjunctive, it will be enough for the State to show that the law relates to  land covered by an "estate" falling in at least  one  of the sub-clauses.  It was submitted that the private  forests in  Malabar are held in janman right and hence they  are  an ,estate within the meaning of sub-clause (i).  If the  State further  shows,  he  contended, that  the  law  envisages  a measure  of  agrarian reform it was not  necessary  for  the State  to  establish  additionally, that  forest  lands  are similar  to lands described in sub-clause (iii), that is  to say,  lands held or let for purposes of agriculture  or  for purposes ancillary thereto.  In short, in the submission  on behalf  of  the State, the forest lands with  which  we  are concerned are an ’estate’ within the meaning of Article 3  1 A  (2) (a) (i) of the Constitution and since section  10  of the impugned Act, inter alia, embodies a scheme of  agrarian reform, the Act is valid. This will be the proper place to refer to the provisions  of the  Act.   The Act is described as one to provide  for  the vesting in the Government of private forests in the State of Kerala and for the assignment thereof to agriculturists  and agricultural  laborers for cultivation.  The preamble is  as follows: "WHEREAS  the  private forests in the State  of  Kerala  are agricultural lands; AND WHEREAS Government consider that such agricultural lands should  be  so  utilised as to  increase,  the  agricultural production  in the State and to promote the welfare  of  the agricultural population in the State; AND WHEREAS Government also consider that to give effect  to the  above  objectives  it is  necessary  that  the  private forests should vest in the Government; BE it enacted etc. By  Section 1 the Act is made to extend to the whole of  the State of Kerala and is deemed to have come into force on the 10th  day of May, 1971.  Section 2 gives  some  definitions. We  are not concerned with all of them.  Clause (e)  defines an owner as follows :               "(c) "owner", in relation to a private forest,               includes  a mortgagee, lessee or other  person               having  right to possession and  enjoyment  of               the private forest."  676 Clause (f) defines "private forest".  Private forest means,- (1)in relation to the Malabar district referred to in sub- section(2)  of section 5 of the States Re-organisation  Act, 1956 (Central Act 37 of 1956),-  (i)  any land to which the Madras Preservation  of  Private Forests  Act,  1949  (Madras Act  XXVII  of  1949),  applied immediately before the appointed day excluding- (A)lands  which  are gardens or nilams as defined  in  the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (1 of 1964); (B)  lands which are used principally for the cultivation of tea, coffee,cocoa, rubber, cardamom or cinnamon and lands used for any purposeancillary  to  the  cultivation  of such  crops  or  for the preparation of  the  same  for  the market. (C)  lands  which are principally cultivated with cashew  or other fruit-bearing trees or are principally cultivated with

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 24  

any other agricultural crop; and (D)sites  of  buildings  and  lands  appurtenant  to,  and necessary  for  the  convenient enjoyment or  use  of,  such buildings; (ii)any  forest not owned by the Government, to  which  the Madras  Preservation of Private Forests Act, 1949,  did  not apply,,  including  waste lands which  are  enclaves  within wooded areas; (2)in  relation  to the remaining areas in  the  State  of Kerala,  any forest not owned by the  Government,  including waste lands which are enclaves within wooded areas." Section  3  is  important.   "Private  forests  to  vest  in Government(1)  Notwithstanding  anything  contained  in  any other law for the time being in force, or in any contract or other  document,  but  subject to  the  provisions  of  sub- sections (2) and (3), with effect on and from the  appointed day, the ownership and possession of all private forests  in the  State  of Kerala shall, by virtue of  this  Act,  stand transferred  to and vested in the Government free  from  all encumbrances, and the right, title and interest of the owner or  any  other  person in any, private  forest  shall  stand extinguished." The appointed day means the 10th day of  May, 1971.  Sub-sections (2) to (4) of section 3 are not relevant for  our  present  enquiry.  Since  some  time  lag  between vesting  and distribution under section 10  was  inevitable, section 4 provided as follows : "4. Private forests to be deemed to be reserved forests- All  private  forests vested in the  Government  under  sub- section  (1)  of  section 3 shall, so long  as  they  remain vested  in the Government, be deemed to be reserved  forests constituted  under the Kerala Forest Act, 1961 (4  of  1962) and  the  provisions of that Act shall, so far  as  may  be, apply to such private forests."  677 Section  5 provides for eviction of persons in  unauthorised occupation  and section 6 for the demarcation of  boundaries of the private forests. Section 7 provides for the constitution of Tribunals,  their powers  and  functions.   Sub-clause  (2)  of  that  section provides that "the Tribunal shall consist of a single person who  is, or has been, or is qualified to be appointed as,  a District Judge." Section  8  provides that "Where any, dispute arises  as  to whether--               (a)’ any land is a private forest or not; or               (b)   any  private forest or  portion  thereof               has been vested in the Government or not,  the               person  who  claims  that the land  is  not  a               private forest or that the private forest  has               not vested in the Government, may apply to the               Tribunal  for decision of the  dispute.   Sub-               section  (3)  provides that "if  the  Tribunal               decides that any land is not a private  forest               or  that a private forest or  portion  thereof               has   not  vested  in  the   Government,   the               custodian  shall, as soon as may  be,  restore               possession  of such land or private forest  or               portion, as the case may be, to the person  in               possession  thereof  immediately  before   the               appointed day." Section  9 provides that "No compensation shall  be  payable for  the vesting in the Government of any private forest  or for  the extinguishment of the right, tide and  interest  of the  owner or any other person in any private  forest  under sub-section(1) of section 3."

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 24  

Having thus provided for acquisition of private forest lands without  the  necessity  to pay  compensation  the  Act  now proceeds to provide for a scheme of agrarian reform. Section 10 Assignment of Private forests.-(1) The Government shall,  after reserving such extent of the  private  forests vested in the Government under sub-section (1) of section  3 or of the lands comprised in such private forests as may  be necessary  for  purposes directed towards the  promotion  of agriculture  or the welfare ’of the agricultural  population or  for  purposes ancillary thereto, assign on  registry  or lease to-               (a)   agriculturists;               (b)   agricultural laborers;               (c)   Members   of   Scheduled   Castes    and               Scheduled  Tribes who are willing to  take  up               agriculture as means of their livelihood;               (d)   unemployed  young persons  belonging  to               families  of agriculturists  and  agricultural               laborers,  who  have no  sufficient  means  of               livelihood  and  who are willing  to  take  up               agriculture as means of their livelihood;                678               (e)   laborers   belonging  to   families   of               agriculturists   and  agricultural   laborers,               whose principal means of livelihood before the               appointed day was the income they obtained  as               wages for work in collection with or relate to               private forests and who are willing to take up                             agriculture as means of their liveliho od. the remaining private forests or the lands comprised in  the private   forests  on  such  terms  and  subject   to   such conditions. and restrictions as may be prescribed." "(2)  The  Government may, by notification in  the  Gazette, delegate their power under sub-section (1) to any officer of the  Government  or  any class of  officers  of  Government, subject to such restrictions and control as may be specified in the notification." (3)The  extent  of private forests or lands  comprised  in private  forests  which  may be, assigned  to  each  of  the categories  of persons specified in sub-section(1)  and  the order  of preference in which assignment may, be made  shall be such as may be prescribed." Section 11 is important.  It reads : "Assignment to be  made within  two years.-Assignment of the private forests or  the lands  comprised therein under section 10 shall, as  far  as may  be,  completed  within  two  years  from  the  date  of publication of this Act in the Gazette." Section  12 deals with the powers of the Tribunals  and  the custodian  and  Section. 13 bars the jurisdiction  of  civil courts. Section  15 reads : "Constitution of Agriculturists  Welfare Fund.(1) A fund called the Agriculturists Welfare Fund shall be  constituted  by the Government to be  utilised  for  the settlement and welfare of persons to whom private forests or lands comprised in private forests, have been assigned under section  10 and shall be administered in such manner as  way be prescribed." "(2)  The Fund referred to in sub-section (1) shall  consist of  grants  or loans by or from the  Government  and  monies received by the Government by the,sale of trees standing  in such  portion  of  the  private forests as  are  or  may  be assigned under section 10". Section  17  provides  for the rules  making  power  of  the Government.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 24  

By the repealing section 18 several Acts have been  repealed including   the   Kerala  Private   Forests   (Vesting   and Assignment) Ordinance. 1971 which had been promulgated prior to this Act. In  short the Act purports to acquire forest lands  without payment  of  compensation  for  implementing  a  scheme   of agrarian reform by assigning lands on registry or by way  of lease  to  the  poorer sections of  the  rural  agricultural population.   This is done after reserving portions  of  the forests as may- be necessary for purposes "directed  towards the   promotion  of  agriculture  or  the  welfare  of   the agricultural population or for purposes ancillary  thereto." This  scheme of agrarian reform is intended to be  completed within two years. 679 Mr. Chagla, who addressed us the principal argument in  this case on behalf of the owners, contended that private forests could  not  be converted into agricultural lands by  a  mere legislative  flat  contained  in the Preamble  of  the  Act, because  forest  lands  are  lands  in  which  forests  grow spontaneously  and naturally without human effort  or  skill and  are  quite  distinct from.  agricultural  lands  which, however  defined,  must contain the element of  tilling  the soil  for sowing and planting.  He pointed out that in  sub- clause  (iii)  of Article 31A (2) (a) a forest land  may  be regarded as an agricultural land only when that land is held or let for purposes of agriculture or for purposes ancillary thereto in which case a forest land may be included in  the, definition of the word ’estate’.  It was not shown that vast areas of private forests which are now in the possession  of the  owners  and the lessees thereof were held  or  let  for purposes  of agriculture and hence they cannot be  regarded: as an ’estate’ within the definition.  That alone  according to  Mr.  Chagla  deprived the Act of  the  protection  under Article  31A(1).  Secondly, assuming that forest  lands  are ’estate"  within the definition, he further  contended  that their  acquisition was not for implementing any,  scheme  of agrarian  reform  but for a collateral purpose,  namely,  to increase the revenues of the State by exploiting the  forest wealth  of  the lands by selling valuable  timber  naturally growing in them. Since the Preamble to the impugned Act forests in the  State of   Kerala  are  ’agricultural  lands’  and  there  is   no definition  of what is meant by ’agricultural lands’ in  the Act  itself,  we shall have to consider in  what  sense  the expression  ’agricultural lands’ has been used in  the  Act. It is conceded by the learned Advocate General for the State of  Kerala  that a mere recital in  the  Preamble,  although admissible,  will  not be conclusive of the facts.   But  he submits  that courts should show decent respect to  such  an affirmation  of fact because the legislature of a  State  is presumed to know the character of the lands situated in  the State,  the tenure under which they are’ held, the  use  and abuse  to  which they are put and the manner in  which  such natural  resources of the State are best .utilized  for  the benefit of the community.  He submits that this  affirmation in  the  Preamble is not irresponsibly, made  and  that  the expression  ’agricultural lands’ has been used in a  special sense having regard to the uses to which these forest  lands have  been put over generations.  In his  submission  forest lands  in Kerala are agricultural lands in, the  sense  that they are capable of being used for raising food crops.. cash crops, plants or trees and other purposes of husbandry. The statement of objects and reasons in the Act contains the following :

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 24  

"There  are  vast extents of private forests  in  the  State particularly  in  the Malabar area where  such  forests  are owned  by Janmies.  These private forests  are  agricultural lands.   In  the Judgment reported in 1969  K.L.T.  320  (V. Venugopala Varma Rajaa v. Controller of Estate Duty, Kerala) a  division  bench of the High Court has held  that  in  the absence of exceptional circumstances such as the land being. 680 entirely  rocky  and barren for other reasons,  all  forests lands- in the State are agricultural lands in the sense that they   can  be  prudently  and  profitably   exploited   for agriculturing purposes." Reference may also be made in this connection to some of the passages in the affidavit filed by Shri K. Viswanathan Nair, Joint Secretary to Government of Kerala, Law Department,  in this  connection.   In  para  4 of  his  affidavit  he  says "Approximately  28  per cent of the total land area  in  the Kerala  State  constitutes forest lands.   Generally  forest lands comprised in the erstwhile native States of Travancore and Cochin area are owned by Government, whereas that of the erstwhile  Malabar  District of Madras  Presidency  belonged partly  to  private  individuals and partly,  to  the  State Government.   It  was  estimated that the  total  extent  of private  forests in Malabar area would come to  about  1,200 sq. miles, i.e. about 7.5 lakh acres...... As per the Survey conducted by the Madras Government in the year 1945, private forest lands in Malabar area, the extent of which was  found to  be  1,200  sq.  miles  then,  belonged  to  116  private individuals, the extent owned by them varying from 100 acres to  1,0,0,000 acres." Then he proceeds to say’, "the  forest lands  in  Kerala are agricultural lands and can be  put  to cultivation of various food and cash crops.  Cultivation  of forest  lands will increase the agricultural  production  in the  State  and  will also provide means  of  livelihood  to landless  agricultural laborers.  The Government  considered such  lands  should  be distributed  to  those  persons  for purposes  of  agriculture and that to ensure  effective  and proper  distribution  of  such lands,  the  private  forests should be vested in the Government." Then at para 19 he states as follows : "It  is also pertinent to, place before this  Hon’ble  Court the  fact  that  in large tracts of  areas  which  had  been already clear-felled by the owners of the private forests or their contractors, food-crops like coffee, coconut.  pepper, etc..  have been raised converting them into such food  crop plantations.  Even planting teak and other plantation  crops is  agricultural operation and the lands on which these  are planted are agricultural lands.  After assignment of private forests  from  the  jenmies or after  trespassing  into  the private  forests,  large  numbers of settlers  of  the  poor classes have clear-felled the forests including dense forest areas  and have cultivated food crops therein.   Plantations like  tea,  coffee,  rubber, ’teak and  cardamom  have  been raised  in  the private forests by the  rich  planters.   In other  places  after clear-felling  the  forests,  cocoanut, areca, tapioca and other cultivations have been raised,  the yield  of  which  is  found to  be  considerably  high  when compared  to  the  other areas  of  the  State.   Similarly, coffee,  pepper and rubber plantations have been  successful in the forest lands in Wynad (Malabar District)". A  fact to which attention must be drawn is that  whereas  a large  proportion  of the forests in the  former  Travancore Cochin  State  belonged to the Government and only  a  small proportion to private owners or janmies, the position in the Malabar  District was just the ,opposite.  Forest  lands  in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 24  

that District belonged predominantly to  681 private owners or janmies Many of these private owners  were heads  of Hindu Religious Endowments., A committee known  as the  Kutti  Krishna Menon Committee had been  appointed  for recommending  the  unification  of laws  relating  to  Hindu Religious Endowments in the Madras State and that Committee, in  one place of its report, suggested-and this is  referred to in the affidavit-as follows :               "74.  We would suggest that the large areas of               virgin  forest lands available within some  of               the  Devaswoms may be utilized for  plantation               of   cocoanut,.  arecanut,   pepper,   cashew,               rubber, etc." The Malabar Tenancy Act, 1929 as ,mended in 1951,  contained the following provision : "52.(1)  The  State Government or such officer as  they  may authorise  in this behalf may by order require the  landlord of  any  waste or forest land to lease it  for  agricultural purposes  to  such  person for such  term  subject  to  such conditions and within such times as may be specified in  the order." By  reason  of the increasing population of  the  area,  and consequent pressure on land, there was widespread  squatting by agriculturists in forest areas where trees ’were cut  and large  blocks , were brought under the plough.   The  former State  of Travancore and Cochin bowed to the  inevitable  by regularising  the  occupation by unauthorised  settlers  and issued  orders  for settling agriculturists on land  in  the forests  which  could be put to agricultural use.   In  this connection the affidavit says: "Forest  lands in the Travancore-Cochin area of  the  State, which  are Government Reserve Forests have been widely  used since  long  past  for agriculture  and  purposes  ancillary thereto by persons to whom these lands were assigned by  the State  and  by large numbers of encroachers.  Use  of  these lands  for agricultural purposes on a large scale  has  been adverted  to,  in  the Report of the  Sub-Committee  on  the eviction  of encroachers from the forest lands in the  State of  Kerala,  to which also this respondent craves  leave  to refer in detail at the hearing.  The Government is currently distributing 3 lakh acres of forest lands for settlement  of agriculturists." Reference was also made to the report of the Special Officer Shri  K. Anantan Pillai who was asked to prepare a  list  of arable lands in the reserve forests-of the former Travancore and  Cochin suitable for cultivation.  That report was  made in  1969.   The extracts from his report are  given  in  the affidavit  and  they  show  to  what  extent  lands  in  the Government  reserve forests were made available to ,  hungry agriculturists  for food production.  The officer says  "Now that  the position of food supplies is far more serious  and the scope for finding employment for a very large number  of people is getting more and more limited, one of the possible alternate  solutions will be to take a fairly big  slice  of cultivable  land from the Government forests for  assignment to these people.  With this object in view, I have inspected 682 these  lands  in all these divisions and I have  prepared  a list  of areas considered suitable for cultivation,  details of  which are furnished." After furnishing the  details  the Officer says : "The present attempt is to find out  suitable cultivable lands in the reserve area and to give the land on a systematic basis.  With this view in mind I have tried  to find  out suitable areas preferably in large  blocks.   This

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 24  

will  help the formation of fairly large sized  colonies  or villages so that the allottees can have a social life and in course of time all the facilities for communal living can be provided  to  them.   If a large block  is  taken,  normally because of the nature of land in our State a few steep hills cannot be excluded.  The colony can be formed on the base of these  hills  in  fairly elevated places and  it  can  be-so arranged  that  the  individual  families  will  have  their residences at convenient places (within two or three  miles) in  relation to the area he is given for cultivation.   Some of  the  blocks I have pointed out are  fairly  large  areas where even small townships can be formed.  This will aid the formation of cooperative societies to help the allottees  in both their cultivation and in constructing suitable building for ’them." This shows how the Special Officer felt the need of settling chunks of the agricultural population in  blocks of  reserve  forests and envisaged the  formation  of  large blocks in the forest area so that in the neighborhood and on the  slopes of the hills villages and even  small  townships could be built.  The Officer was chiefly concerned with  the reserve  forests in the Kerala State.  But in his report  he also  referred  to  the  private  forests  in  the   Malabar District.   In  that connection he says "Apart from  this  I understand  that  extensive  areas of  private  forests  are available  in  the  Malabar Districts.   They  can  also  be acquired and distributed." It  must be remembered that what is stated  generally  about the  nature of the reserve forest lands in the old State  of Travancore  Cochin  applies equally to  the  private  forest lands  of  Malabar District because all  these  forests  are contiguous and form one long belt of a mountainous  terrain- now  forming part of the State of Kerala.  It will  be  thus seen that all forest lands, whether reserve or private, have been   applied  for  generations  for  the   settlement   of agriculturists whether such settlements were authorised  for unauthorised.  Vast areas-in the forests were  clear-felled, as  the expression goes, for bringing patches and blocks  of lands  under  agriculture.  Several types  of  produce  were obtained by agriculture and a large population lives on  the same.  Plantations of, coffee, tea, rubber, cardamom and the like were grown on an extensive scale in these forests.   In recent years Industrialists have taken leases of vast  areas of  these  forests from their owners and a fraction  of  the same   has  been  brought  under  cultivation  by   planting eucalyptus  and  other types of trees useful for  paper  and other  industries.  Large areas in these forests seem to  be even  now  in their pristine form but are capable  of  being utilized  by absorbing a large proportion of the  population by  settling  them on the land.  These  forests,  therefore, have attained a peculiar character owing to their  geography and climate and the evidence available to us shows that vast areas   of these forests are still capable of  supporting  a large  agricultural population.  The  several  authoritative reports  683 to  which  reference was made in the,  affidavit  were  made available to us and the extracts therefrom were read out  at the  time  of the. argument.  They seem to  support  what  a bench of the Kerala- High Court said in V. Venugopala  Varma Rajaa  v. Controller of Estate Duty, Kerala(1) in para 6  of the judgment.  "It is well-known that the extensive areas of different varieties of plantations that we have got in  this State  were once forest lands; and it is also equally  well- known that year. after year large areas of, forest lands  in this  State  are being cleared and converted  into  valuable

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 24  

plantations.   In the absence of  exceptional  circumstances such as the land being entirely rocky , or barren for  other reasons,  all  forest lands in this State  are  agricultural lands in the sense that they can be prudently and profitably exploited for agricultural purposes." This judicial  opinion as  we  have  already  seen has  been  referred  to  in  the Statement  of  Objects  and  Reasons of  the  Act.   It  is, therefore, manifest that when the legislature stated in  the Preamble  that  the private forests are  agricultural  land, they  merely wanted to convey that they are lands  which  by and  large could be prudently and profitably  exploited  for agricultural purposes. Having  appreciated the true nature and character  of  these private forests we have to see whether they can be  regarded as ’estate’ within ’the contemplation of Article 31A (2)  of the Constitution.  That Article is as follows :               "31A.  (a) the expression "estate"  shall,  in               relation  to  any local areas, have  the  same               meaning  as  that  expression  or  its   local               equivalent has in the existing law relating to               land  tenures in force in that area and  shall               also include-               (i)   any  jagir,  inam  or  maufi  or   other               similar grant and in the States of Madras  and               Kerala, any jamman right;               (ii)any land held under ryotwari settlement;               (iii)any  land  held or let for  purposes  of               agriculture or for purposes ancillary thereto.               including   waste  land,  forest  land,    for               pasture  or  sites  of  buildings  and   other               structures  occupied by cultivators  of  land,               agricultural laborers and village artisans;               (b)   The expression "rights?’, in relation to               an estate, shall include any rights vesting in               a    proprietor,    sub-proprietor,     under-               proprietor,  tenure-holder,  (raiyat,   under-               raiyat)  or other intermediary and any  rights               or privileges in respect of land revenue." The  definition of ’estate’ is an inclusive definition.   In subclauses (i), (ii) and (iii) certain categories of  rights and  lands  are  included  in the  definition  of  the  word ’estate’.   It  is the contention on behalf  of  the  Kerala State that these forest lands which are held in janmam right fall  squarely under sub-clause (i).  Since janmam tight  to these  lands is in an ’estate’ it could be acquired  by  the State (1)  [1969] K. L. T. 230. 684 under   Article  31A(a)(1)(a).   There  is  force  in   this contention.   Janman  rights  in the States  of  Madras  and Kerala  are,  as explained by Subba Rao, J.  in  Kavalappara Kottarathil  Kochuni  and others v. The State of Madras  and others(1)  rights  of  hereditary  proprietorship  in  land. These  rights, like the rights created by grant of jagir  or inam relating to land, which included agricultural lands  or waste lands or forests and hills (See: State of U.P. v. Raja Anand Brahma Shah) (2), are brought within the definition of the word ’estate’, and are, therefore, liable to be acquired by the State under Article 31A(1)(a). It is not disputed that all the private forests. with  which we  are  now  concerned are held in  Janmam  right.   Janmam rights  being an ,estate’ are liable to be acquired  by  the State  under Article 31A(1) (a) as a necessary step  to  the implementation  of  agrarian  reform.   Section  3  of   the impugned  Act  vests  the ownership and  possession  of  all

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 24  

private forests in the State.  Therefore they would  attract the protection of Article 31A(1).  It would not be, in  such a case, necessary to further examine if the lands so  vested in the Government are agricultural lands falling within sub- clause  (iii).   This is explained in some  detail  by  this Court  in Balmadies Plantations Ltd. v. State of Tamil  Nadu (3) in para 15 at page 147. Indeed  this does not mean that the State is  absolved  from showing that the acquisition is for the purpose of  agrarian reform.   In fact in Balmadies case, referred to above,  the acquisition of forests owned by janmies was set aside on the sole ground that the impugned law or the material on  record did  not  indicate  that the transfer of  forests  from  the janmies  to  the  Government was linked in any  way  with  a scheme of agrarian reform or betterment of village economy. What then is the scheme of agrarian reform envisaged in  the impugned Act?  The title of the Act shows that it is an  act to  provide  for the vesting in the  Government  of  private forests  for  the assignment thereof to  agriculturists  and agricultural  laborers for cultivation.  The Preamble  shows that  such private forests which the legislature thought  to be  agricultural  lands  in the  sense,  already  explained, should  be  so utilised as to  increase  their  agricultural production in the State and to promote, the welfare of  the agricultural population in the State.  It is further  stated in  the Preamble that in order to give effect to  the  above objects  it  was necessary that the private  forests  should vest  in the Government.  The objectives of  increasing  the agricultural production and the promotion of the welfare  of the  agricultural  population  are  clearly  a   predominant element in agrarian reform.  How these objectives are to  be implemented are generally stated in sections 10 and 11.  All the  private forests, after certain reservations, are to  be assigned  to agriculturists or agricultural laborers and  to the  poorer  classes of the rural population  desiring  bona fide to take up agriculture as a means of their  livelihood. The  reservation  in  respect of  certain  portions  of  the forests is also made (1)[1960] 3 S. C. R. 887. (2) [1967] 1 S. C. R. 362. (3)[1972] 2 S.C. C. 133.  685 in  the interest of the agricultural population because  the section  says that the reservations will be such-as  may  be necessary  for  purposes directed towards the  promotion  of agriculture or welfare of the agricultural population or for purposes  ancillary  thereto.  Section 11  further  provides that after making the necessary’ reservations the scheme for the  assignment of the private forests to the various  bene- ficiaries  described in section 10 shall, as far as  may  be completed within two years from the date of the  publication of the Act.  The conditions and restrictions under which the assignments  are  to  take place have to  be  prescribed  by rules.   We understand that in view of the stay  granted  by the courts, the rules have not been framed.  But it is clear that  the rules will have to be framed forthwith because  of the  urgency of the matter as seen in section ’11 and  these rules  will  undoubtedly unfold the details  of  the  scheme generally  envisaged  in  section  10.   It  would  not   be necessary  to  emphasize  that the rules  will  have  to  be consistent  with  the purposes of the Act.  In  statutes  of this  nature,  provision  can  only  be  generally  made  to indicate the broad details of the scheme for agrarian reform and  that  is what is done in the Act.   In  Balmadies  case referred to above no such scheme had been envisaged.  But in another  case namely the Kannan Devan Hills Produce  v.  The

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 24  

State of Kerala and another(1) the Statute viz.  The  Kannan Devan Hills (Resumption of Lands) Act 5 of 1971 disclosed  a scheme in section 9 which is very similar to our own section 10  of  the  impugned Act.  Section 9 of  that  Act  was  as follows               "9.  Assignment of lands.-(1)  The  Government               shall,  after  reserving such  extent  of  the               lands,  the possession of which has vested  in               the Government under sub-clause (1) of section               3  ...  ........... as may  be  necessary  for               purposes  directed  towards the  promotion  of               agriculture or the welfare of the agricultural               population  to  be  settled  on.  such  lands,               assign  on  registry the  remaining  lands  to               agriculturists  and agricultural  laborers  in               such manner, on such terms and subject to such               conditions   and  restrictions,  as   may   be               prescribed." That scheme as envisaged in this section was upheld by  this Court as a scheme for agrarian reform and we do not see  any good reason why we should take a different view with  regard to the scheme envisaged in section 10 ’of the impugned Act. The  High  Court  thought that the scheme was  not  real  or genuine  but illusory and has given some reasons in para  12 of the judgment why it took that view.  The reasons given do not  stand  scrutiny.  One reason was that  whereas  in  the Kannan Devan Hills (Resumption of Lands) Act, 1971 Section 9 provided  for’ only assignment on registry of the lands,  in section 10 of the impugned Act the forest lands are intended to  be  assigned  both  on registry and  by  way  of  lease. Exception  is taken to assignments by way’ of lease  on  the ground  that the lessee does not get any fixing  of  tenure. Rules are to (1)  [1972] 2 S. C.  C. 218. 686 be  still framed and it would be too early now to  say  what conditions and restrictions will be imposed, in the  leases. Moreover,  assuming that there is no fixity of tenure,  that would not mean that leases in favour of , agriculturists  or agricultural laborers are not part of agrarian reform.   The point  is that forest lands, overgrown by shrubs and  jungle growth, will have to be cleared in the first instance before the  land  is made cultivable; and after the  land  is  made cultivable agricultural produce will be grown there by  some lessee  or  the  other.  Assuming  any  particular  lessee’s tenure is not fixed, that would not mean that the land  will remain  fallow.   Other agriculturists will  step  into  the shoes of the lessee and the process of growing  agricultural produce will continue in the interest of the grower and  the agricultural  community as a whole.  The other reason  given is  that there is no provision with regard to trees  in  the forest reserve under section 10 and a suspicion is expressed that  the Government may appropriate to itself the value  of the  trees.  Mention is made that even a single log of  rose wood fetches a price of Rs. 40,000/-.  It seems, however, to have  escaped the notice of the High Court that the  reserve portions  of  the  forests under,  section  10  are  clearly earmarked  in  the  section  itself  for  purposes  directed towards  the promotion of agriculture or the welfare of  the agricultural  population or for purposes ancillary  thereto. There  is, therefore, no foundation for the  suspicion  that valuable  trees  which  form part  of  the  reserve  private forests  are  liable to be appropriated for  purposes  other than  those  specifically  mentioned  in  that  section   15 provides for the constitution of the Agriculturists  Welfare

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 24  

Fund and this relates to the price of trees standing in  the lands  assigned on registry or given on lease.   That  fund, according  to  sub-clause (2) shall consist  of  grants  and loans  by or from the Government and monies received by  the Government by the sale of trees standing in such portions of the private forests as are or may be assigned under  section 10.   No such fund is created for the purpose of  the  trees standing  in the reserve area.  But that does not mean  that the  value of the trees in the reserve area can be  utilized for  purposes  other than those  specifically  mentioned  in section 10.  That will be part of the scheme and  Government will have to take adequate provision as to how the value  of the trees can be utilized for purposes directed towards  the promotion  of  agriculture or welfare  of  the  agricultural population or for purposes ancillary thereto. Another  objection  was  that  assignment  of  land  without demarcation  and survey was unpracticable and productive  of strife.    We  do  not  see  why  assignment  of   land   is impracticable  in  the absence of survey.  Even  before  the introduction  of the, survey, lands had been assigned  and cultivated  by  agriculturists.  The process  of  assignment must involve demarcation of the land assigned.   Sub-section (3)  of section 10 says "the extent of private  forests  or lands comprised in private forests which may be assigned  to each  of the categories of persons specified in  sub-section (1)  and the order of preference in which assignment may  be made shall be such as may be prescribed." After  determining the extent of the land to be assigned, the land,  687 when assigned,, will have to be inevitably demarcated by the officers   who  make  the  assignment.   That  is   not   an insuperable  difficulty.  As a matter of fact we  know  from the affidavit on behalf of the Government that about 3  lakh acres of forests land have been already distributed.  Indeed steps  should be taken for an early survey in the  interests of law and order.  But survey is not the sine-qua-non of any genuine  scheme for distribution of land.  We do  not  think that  the High Court has given any substantial  reasons  for coming to the. conclusion that the scheme of agrarian reform is a"teasing illusion and a promise in unreality." in  an attempt to show that the impugned Act was a piece  of colorable  legislation,  reference was made  to  the  Kerala Private  Forests Acquisition Bill, 1968 L.A. Bill No. 33  of 1968  which provided for the acquisition of private  forests on payment of compensation for the acquisition.  ’Nat  Bill, it  is contended, was allowed to lapse and the  present  Act was enacted with the obvious intention of expropriating vast forest  lands  without paying compensation.  We  can  hardly countenance  such an argument.  The question really  is,  in the  first  place, of the competence of the  legislature  to pass the impugned Act and, in the second, whether the Act is constitutional in the sense that it is protected by  section 31A(1).   So  far as the competence of  the  legislature  is concerned,  no  objection  is  made before  us.  As  to  its constitutionality  we  have shown that the Act  purports  to vest the janmam rights to the forests in the Government as a step  in  the implementation of agrarian  reform.   If  this could be constitutionally done by the legislature, the  fact that at an earlier stage the Government was toying with  the idea of paying compensation to owners of private forests  is of little consequence.  The dominant purpose of the impugned Act, as already pointed out, is to distribute forest  lands for  agricultural  purposes after  making  reservations  ’of portions of the forests for the benefit of the  agricultural community.   The  fear is expressed that such a  course  if,

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 24  

genuinely implemented, may lead to deforestation on a  large scale  leading  to soil erosion and silting  of  rivers  and streams and will actually turn out to be detrimental to  the interests of the agricultural community in the long run’  it is  undoubtedly true that rackless deforestation might  lead to very unhappy results.  But we have no material before  us for  expressing  opinion on such a matter.  It  is  for  the legislature  to  balance  the comparative  advantages  of  a scheme  like  the  one  envisaged in  the  Act  against  the possible  disadvantages of resulting  deforestation.   There are many imponderables to which we have no safe guides.   It is  presumed  that the legislature knows the  needs  of  its people  and  will  balance the  present  advantages  against possible future disadvantages.  If there is pressure on land and  the legislature feels that forest lands in some,  areas can  be  conveniently and, without much damage to  the  com- munity as a whole, utilized for settling a large  proportion of the agricultural population, it is perfectly open,  under the constitutional Powers vested in the legislature, to make a  suitable  law; and if the law is  constitutionally  Valid this  Court can hardly strike it down on the ground that  in the long run the legislation instead of turning out to be  a boon will turn out to be a curse. 392SupCI/74 688 Mr.  Menon who appeared for the respondent in  Civil  Appeal No.  1398/72  put  forward  a  plea  of  equitable  estoppel peculiar to his client company.  It appears that the Company established  itself  in Kerala for the production  of  rayon cloth  pulp  on an understanding that the  Government  would bind  itself to supply the raw-meterial.   Later  Government was  unable  to  supply the material  and  by  an  agreement undertook  not to legislate for the acquisition  of  private forests  for a period of 60 years if the  Company  purchased forest lands for the purpose of its supply of raw-materials. Accordingly,  the Company purchased 30,000 acres of  private forests from the Nilabhuri KovilaKannan  estate.  for  Rs. 75/- lakhs and, therefore, it was argued that, so far as the company is concerned, the-agreement not to legislate  should operate as equitable estoppel against the State.  We do  not see  how  an  agreement  of  the  Government  can   preclude legislation  on  the subject.  The High  Court  has  rightly pointed  out  that the surrender by the, Government  of  its legislative  powers to be used for pubic good  cannot  avail the  company or operate against the Government as  equitable estoppel. In the result the appeals are allowed and the Writ Petitions dismissed.   It is declared that the Kerala Private  Forests (Vesting  and  Assignment)  Act,  1971  is  constitutionally valid.  There shall be no order as to costs. KRIsHNA  IYER, J. The holding and the reasons  expressed  in the   leading   opinion   happily   coincide   with    ours. Nevertheless,  the  problems raised and the  points  debated bear  upon  such  seminal  Issues  that  some  supplementary observations from us may not be supererogatory. Certain Owners of vast extents of private, forests aggrieved by the deprivation, without compensation, of their ownership under the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting & Assignment) Act, 1971  (Act 26 of 1971) (hereinafter called, for  short,  the Forest  Act)  challenged  its vires under art.  226  of  the Constitution on the score that it violated their fundamental rights  under arts. 14, 19 and 31 and was not  immunised  by art.  31A from the lethal sting of art. 13.  The High  Court upheld  the  attack and voided the  statute.   The  defeated State has sought in appeal to sustain the  constitutionality

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 18 of 24  

of  the law while others who have suffered by the  operation of  the  statute have come up directly to this  Court  under art. 32.  The impugned Act vests in the State lands of these latifundists, flatly refusing any the littlest compensation, and  the  issue is whether the wings of art.  31A  are  wide enough and the provisions of the Forest Act fair enough  for the Court to grant constitutional shelter. The  State  wields the shield of art. 31A to  ward  off  the private owners’ sword thrust of art. 13 read with arts.  14, 19 and 31 We must examine the application of art. 31A to the Forest Act.  689 Any  law  providing for the acquisition by the State  of  an ’estate’ is saved by art. 31A subject to certain conditions, violation  of  arts. 14, 19 and  31  notwithstanding.-  Sub- article  (2) explains the concept of ’estate’  and  includes therein  janmam rights.  Although art. 31A is worded  widely enough  to  rope in acquisition of any estate by  the  State regardless  of  purpose, the Supreme Court has cut  back  on this  amplitude  by limiting entitlement  to  constitutional protection to agrarian reform legislation only.  Subba  Rao, J.,  in Kochuni’s(1) case, speaking for the Court,  reviewed the  earlier  decisions under art. 31A and  interpreted  the provision  against  the  back-drop of  the  objects  of  the Constitution  (Forth  Amendment) Act, 1955 and  the  earlier Constitution  (First Amendment) Act, 1951, to arrive at  the conclusion  that art. 31A was meant "to facilitate  agrarian reforms".  This Court in the aforesaid decision struck  down the  Madras Marumakkathayam (Removal of Doubts)  Act,  1955, because  "the impugned Act does not effectuate any  agrarian reforms  and regulate the rights inter-se between  landlords and   tenants."   Art.  31A  deprives  citizens   of   their fundamental  rights and such an article cannot be  extended, by  interpretation, to overreach the object implicit in  the article, observed Subba Rao, J., and this judicial gloss has come to stay- Forensic debate has since centered round  what is  agrarian reform, and counsel here have joined  issue  on the claim of the Forest Act to wear this protective mantle. Article  31A  having been read down to  relate  to  agrarian reform,rightly,  if we may say so-in the feudal  context  of the  country  and  the founding faith  in  modernisation  of agriculture   informed   by   distributive   justice,    the controversy  in  the  present case demands a  study  of  the anatomy  and  cardiology  of the  statute,  not  its  formal structure but it-, heart beats. What do we mean by agrarian reform?  The genesis of the con- cerned  constitutional amendments, and the current  economic thinking must legitimately illumine the meaning, along  with lexicographic aids and judicial precedents.  "We must  never forget  it  is  a  Constitution  we  are  expounding."   The seventies of our century pour new life into old concepts and judges must have the feel of it.  So viewed, the  technology of   agrarian   reform  for  a  developing   country   which traditionally  lives in its villages envisages the  national programmes of transmuting rural life from feudal medievalism into  equal, affluent modernism-a wide canvass  overflowing mere  improvement  of  agriculture and reform  of  the  land system. (1)[1960] 3 S. C.R. 887 690 The concept of agrarian reform is a complex and dynamic  one promoting  wider interests than conventional  reorganisation of the land system or distribution of land.  It is  intended to  realise the social function of the land and includes  we are  merely giving, by way of illustration, a  few  familiar

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 19 of 24  

proposals  of agrarian reform-creation of economic units  of rural  production, establishment of adequate credit  system, implementation of modern production techniques, construction of   irrigation  systems  and  adequate   drainage,   making available  fertilizers,  fungicides  and  other  methods  of intensifying   and   increasing   agricultural   production, providing  readily  available  means  of  communication  and transportation,  to  facilitate  proper  marketing  of   the village produce, putting up of silos, ware-  houses etc.  to the extent     necessary for preserving produce and handling it  so as to bring it conveniently within the reach  of  the consumers  when they need it, training of village  youth  in modern  agricultural  practices with a  view  to  maximising production and help solve social problems that are found  in relation    to the life of    the agricultural community.The village man, his welfare, is the target. Moving the first constitution Amendment Bill, the then Prime Minister,  who  was  in a large  sense  the  protagonist  of constitution framing for the country, observed :               "Now  apart from our commitment, a  survey  of               the  world today, a survey of Asia today  will               lead  any intelligent person to see  that  the               basic  and  the primary problem  is  the  land               problem today in Asia, as in India.  And every               day  of  delay adds to the.  difficulties  and               dangers,  apart  from being  an  injustice  in               itself."               ".....  But inevitably, in big social  changes               some people have to suffer.  We have too think               in   terms   of  large   schemes   of   social               engineering,  not  petty reforms  but  of  big               schemes like that."               At  the  end of an extensive debate  he  again               emphasized               "May I remind the House that this question  of               land reform is most intimately connected  with               food   production.    We   talk   about   food               production and grow-more-food and if there  is               agrarian trouble and insecurity of land tenure               nobody  knows what is to happen.  Neither  the               zamindar   nor  the  tenant  can  devote   his               energies  to food production because there  is               instability." This reference to the apposite parliamentary debate  reveals the  special  significance  and  extensive  connotation   of ’agrarian  reform’ in its application to Indian  conditions. Indeed,  art.  31A(2)(iii) itself by referring to  land  for pasture and sites of buildings and other structures occupied by  cultivators, agricultural laborers and village  artisans gives  clear hints of agrarian well-being being  pivotal  to land   reform   in  its   larger   legitimate   connotation. Agricultural economists have focussed attention on the  need of  under-developed  countries to upgrade  the  standard  of living of village communities by resort  691 to  schemes for increasing food production and  reorganising the  land  system.   The  main  features  of  the   agrarian situation in India and in other like countries are the gross inequality   in   land  ownership,  the   disincentives   to production and the desperate backwardness of rural life.  As one Latin American has stated(1) :               "Agrarian  reform ought to be  an  inseparable               part of an agricultural policy which  furthers               the   advance  of  that  aspect  of   economic               activity  in  harmony  with  overall  economic

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 20 of 24  

             development. Agrarian reform likewise  pursues               social  and  political  ends  congruent   with               economic goals, such as the cultural elevation               of  the  peasants,  their  liberation  from  a               vestiges of feudalism, their well-being, their               group  solidarity, and their participation  in               public   life   through   the   mechanism   of               democracy." It  is  thus clear to those,  who  understand  developmental dialectic  and rural planning that agrarian reform  is  more humanist  than mere land reform and, scientifically  viewed, covers   not  merely  abolition  of  intermediary   tenures, zamindaris  and the like but restructuring of  village  life itself  taking  in  its  broad  embrace  the   socioeconomic regeneration   of   the  rural   population.    The   Indian Constitution is a social instrument with an economic mission and  the sense and sweep of its provisions must be  gathered by judicial statesmen on that seminal footing. Indeed,  the decisions of this Court cited at the bar  adopt this meaningfully latitudinarian approach and we may briefly refer to them here. In Ranjit Singh’s(2) case, a semantic liberalism  suggestive of a glimpse of the new horizons and a touch of the winds of change   is   read  into  the  idea  of   agrarian   reform. Hidayatullah,  J.,  quoted a significant  passage  from  Ram Narain Medhi v. State of Bombay,(3) which runs thus :               "With  a  view  to achieve  the  objective  of               establishing a socialistic pattern of  society               in the State within the meaning of Articles 38               and 39 of the Constitution, a further  measure               of  agrarian reform was enacted by  the  State               Legislature,    being   the   impugned    Act,               hereinafter referred to, which was designed to               bring about such distribution of ownership and               control  of  agricultural  lands  as  best  to               subserve  the  common  good  thus  eliminating               concentration   of   wealth,  and   means   of               production to the common detriment." Indeed. the learned Judge struck the true national note,  if we may say so, with great respect, when he observed(2) :               "The   scheme  of  rural   development   today               envisages  not only equitable distribution  of               land  so that there is no undue  imbalance  in               society resulting in a landless class on               (1)   1964-65 (Vol. 50) IOWA Law Review, 529.               (2) [1965] 1 S. C. R. 82, 94.               (3) [1959] Supp. 1 S. C. R. 489.               692               the,  one had and a concentration of  land  in               the hands of a few on the other, but envisages               also  the  raising of economic  standards  and               bettering rural health and social  conditions.               Provisions  for  the assignment  of  lands  to               village  punchayat for the use of the  general               community,  or for hospitals  schools,  manure               pits,  tanning  grounds  etc.  enure  for  the               benefit of rural population must be considered               to be an essential part of the  redistribution               of  holdings  and  open  lands  to  which   no               objection  is apparently taken.   If  agrarian               reforms are to succeed, mere distribution  of               land  to  the landless is not  enough.   There               must be a proper planning of rural economy and               conditions   and  a  body  like  the   village               panchayat  is best designed to promote.  rural

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 21 of 24  

             welfare.  than  individual  owners  of   small               portions of lands." In Rajo Anand’s(1) case, Sikri J., after holding the forests and  waste lands in that case fell within the definition  of ’estate’ proceeded to take the view that acquiring the  many square miles of forests in that case being in the, nature of a  necessary step in the implementation of agrarian  reforms was  impregnably  insulated  by  article  31A.   The   sheer extinguishment   of  certain  types  of  land   grants   and hereditary  holdings  may, in given  circumstances,  without more,  constitute  steps in aid of agrarian  reform.  it  is arguable  that the elimination of ancient janmam may per  se be  regarded as possessing the attribute of agrarian  reform because to wipe out feudal vestiges from our countryside and to  streamline  land  ownership  are  preliminaries  to  the projection of a socialistic order which part IV and art. 31A of  the Constitution strive to create.  However, this  Court has  ruled in Balmadies Plantations Ltd. v. State  of  Tamil Nadu(2) and that decision binds us that a scheme of agrarian reform  is  essential,  apart from  taking  over  of  jamman rights,  to  make  the law valid.  In  the  present  case  a concrete agrarian project is presented by section 10 of  the Forest Act- A substantially similar programme was considered by  this  Court in Kannan Devan’s(3) case  and  approved  as sufficient  to impart to the statute  invulnerability  under art.  31A.  Notwithstanding the attempt of counsel  for  the forest  owners,  to  distinguish between  the  Kannan  Devan provisions  and  section  10 the distinction  is  without  a difference.   Once we accept the thesis  that  developmental orientation and distributive justice are part of and inspire activist agrarian reform, its sweep and reach must extend to cover the needs of the village community as well.  What pro- gramme of agrarian reform should be initiated to satisfy the requirement of rural uplift in a particular community  under the  prevailing  circumstances is a matter  for  legislative judgment.  Here, in this field the legislature is the policy maker  and the court cannot assume the role of an.  economic adviser   or  censor  competent  to  pronounce   whether   a particular programme of agrarian reform is good or bad  from the point of view of the needs of the community.  The sole (1) [1967] 1 S. C. R. 362.  (2) [1972] 2 S. C. C. 133. (3)  [1972] 2 S. C. C. 218.  693 issue  for  the Court is whether it is in fact a  scheme  of agrarian reform, and if it is, the prudence or folly thereof falls outside the orbit of judicial review being a blend  of policy,  politics  and  , economics  ordinarily  beyond  the expertise and proper function of the court. I  We  may,  however, point out here  that  in  ascertaining whether  the,  impugned enactment outlines a  blueprint  for agrarian reform the Court will look to the substance of  the statutory  proposal  and .not its mere  outward  form.   The Court  will closely study to see if the  legislation  merely wears the mask of agrarian reform or it  in reality such.  A label  cannot  salvage  a  statute  from  the  clutches   of constitutional limitations if the agrarian reform  envisaged by  it is "a teasing illusion or promise of unreality."  The Court  should  .not be too gullible to accept  a  scheme  of agrarian reform when it is nothing but a verbal  subterfuge, but  at the same time the Court should not be too astute  to reject  such a scheme because it is not satisfied  with  the wisdom  of the scheme or its technical soundness.   Can  the State take over an industrial unit or a business undertaking without payment of compensation and claim the protection  of art.  31A  by  stating that the  profit  arising  from  such

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 22 of 24  

industrial  unit or business undertaking would  be  utilised for purposes directed to agriculture or welfare of the rural population?   Such an acquisition would obviously not be  an acquisition  for  carrying out a scheme of  agrarian  reform because there will be no direct ’nexus between the, subject- matter acquired and its utilisation for agrarian reform.  It would  not  be enough merely to say that the income  of  the property acquired is to be utilised for purposes of agrarian reform.   The property itself must be acquired for  carrying out  such a reform.  This requirement is satisfied  in  the, present  case because forest lands reserved under s. 10  are to  be utilised "for purposes directed to the, promotion  of agriculture   or  for  the  welfare  of   the   agricultural population  or  for purposes ancillary thereto." We  do  not think  it would have been sufficient merely to provide  that the income from the produce of the forests shall be utilised for   promotion  of  agriculture  or  the  welfare  of   the agricultural population, but the forest lands need not be so utilised.   That  would  have  been  merely  a  devise   for augmenting the revenues of the State though with a direction that such addition to the revenue shall be expended only on’ purposes  of promotion of agriculture or the welfare of  the agricultural population.  But here it is clear on a  reading of s. 10 that the forestsand not merely the income are to be devoted to or directed toward-, the promotion of agriculture or  the  welfare  of  the  agricultural  population  or  for ancillary  uses  closely related to  agrarian  reform.   The details  of  the  scheme of agrarian  reform  to  which  the acquired  forests  would be subjected  cannot  obviously  be embodied  in the statue and they are left to be provided  by rules  which are to be made under s. 17 for the  purpose  of carrying out the Provisions of the statute.  No rules  could so far be made by the State Government. it is said,  because there was a stay against the implementation of the Act  when the  petition  was  pending in the  Kerala  High  Court  and thereafter  the Act was declared to be ultra vires and  void by  the  judgment of the Kerala High Court  which  is  under appeal before 694 ,us.   Now  that  the  Act  is  being  declared  by  us   as constitutionally  valid, the State Government will  have  to make  rules  setting out the precise  programme  of  agraian reform  which is intended to be carried ,out.   Counsel  for the  forest owners has expressed an apprehension  before  us that  the State Government may keep the forests as they  are for  a long number of years and namely go on augmenting  the revenues of the state by cutting and selling timber  growing on them and thereby defeat the rationale of art. 31A itself. But there is no basis or justification for this apprehension because  we are of the view that the agrarian project  would have  to  be spelt out concretely by the,  State  Government within  the  prescribed period of two years or at  any  rate within  a reasonable time thereafter.  If the State  Govern- ment merely goes on making money by cutting and selling  the timber  grown  on  the  forests  without  implementing   the definite proposals of agrarian reform contemplated in s.  10 within a reasonable period of time, it would be a subversion of  the statute and in such a case it would be competent  to the  aggrieved parties to take legal action  compelling  the State to make good the statutory promise and to act In terms of  s. 10, and if the forests are diverted for uses  outside the  scope of s.10 the court could restrain the  State  from such illegitimate adventures. While   a  straight  case  of  mala  fides   vitiating   the legislation  has not been set up, an article in the  Malayam

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 23 of 24  

Dress  by the Chief Minister has been relied on to make  out that  agrarian reform was more a cloak than the real  intent The   Chief   Ministff’s   literary   contribution    cannot necessarily bind the State, although his statement may  help build  a case of colorable legislation. which has  not  been urged  here.   Moreover, the article doe-, not  advance  the case of the petitioners for it envisages a real project  for rural  regeneration  and better production.  It is  good  to remind   ourselves  what  colorable  legislation  means   in constitutional  law.  Reference may be made to the  decision of  this  Court  in  Gajapathi  Narayan  De,)  v.  State  of Orissa(1) where this doctrine was discussed.  Mukherjee, J., clarified the law thus :               "It  may be made clear at the outset that  the               dectrine  of  courable  legislation  does  not               involve  any  question of bona fides  or  mala               fides  on  the part of the  legislature.   The               whole   doctrine  resolves  itself  into   the               question   of  competency  of   a   particular               legislature to enact a particular law.  If the               legislature is competent to pass a  particular               law, the motives which impelled it to act  are               really  irrelevant.  On the other hand if  the               legislature lacks competency. the question  of               motives  does  not arise at all.   Whether"  a               statute  is  constitutional  or  not  is  thus               always   a  question  of  power...  The   idea               conveyed  by the expression is  that  although               apparently a legislature in passing a  statute               purported to act within the               (1) [1954] S. C. R. 1, 10-11,                695               limits of its powers, yet in substance and  in               reality  it  transgressed those  powers,-  the               transgression being veiled by what appears, on               proper  examination, to be a mere pretence  or               disguise." The  Forest  Act  survives  the  attack  on  the  score   of colorable legislation. Considered in this light it is not possible to hold that  S. 10  has no nexus with agrarian settlement.  Of  course,  the programme  held  out in the provision,  if  not  implemented within  a  reasonable  time or otherwise  peverted  to  non- agrarian  purposes,  may give rise  to  judicial  scepticism about  the  Government’s bona fides  and  induce  consequent remedial action.  As we see it, the Forest Act is calculated to  bring  benefit to landless laborers, tribals  and  other proletarian  groups in the over-populated state  of  Kerala. The   fear  that  the    executive  win   dawdle   and delay unreasonably or act obliquely to defeat the agrarian welfare content of the measure may gain credibility when the  scheme is not legislatively time-bound.  In the present case a two- year  period  for reserving foresters and  distributing  the rest is written into the statute itself.  If the State,  for ulterior  ends, prevaricates or betrays the scheme  by  non- implementation or mis-implementation an aggrieved party  may seek relief through a judicial post-audit.  The Court is not altogether  powerless  in such a case, in the light  of  the observations  made by Sikri, C.J, in Kannan Devan’s(1)  case that:               "If  the State were to use lands for  purposes               which  have  no  direct  connection  with  the               promotion   of  agriculture  or   welfare   of               agricultural  population  the State  could  be               restrained  from  using the  lands  for  those

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 24 of 24  

             purposes.  Any fanciful connection with  these               purposes would not be enough." Moreover,  the executive is not wholly unaccountable to  the nation  merely because the law has been  judicially  cleared once. A  grievance  has  been made by the  writ  petitioners  that their extensive forest lands are being confiscated without a paisa of compensation while the timber itself will be  worth crores.   In Khajamian Wakf Estates v. State of  Madras,(2), Hegde,  J.,  was pressed with the contention that  art.  31A does  not  protect  a  legislation  where  no   compensation whatsoever  has been provided when taking the  estate.   The Court,  however,  did not decide the question.  We,  on  our part,  do not think there is any merit in it.  Once we  find the legislative area is barricaded by art. 31A, it cannot be breached  by  arts. 14, 19 and 31 and judicial  break-in  is constitutionally  interdicted.   But, at the same  time,  we must  hasten  to point out that art. 31A is  no  charter  of legislative  freedom  to refuse compensation  altogether  in every  case.   The Court may not strike down a  statute  for non-payment of compensation but the legislature is expected, except in exceptional socio-historical setting, to provide just payment for the deprived persons.  To exclude  judicial review is not to black out the beneficent provisions of (1) [1972] 2 S.C. C. 218. (2) [1971] 2 S. C. R. 890. 696 arts. 14, 19 and 31.  May be the present legislation dealing with  extensive  antiquated  janmam rights  relates  to  the exceptional  category.  All that we can say is that this  is an  area where not the court but the elector is  the  proper corrective instrument. For these and other reasons already mentioned in the leading judgment  of  our learned brother, Mr. Justice  Palekar,  we agree that the appeals be allowed and the writ petitions  be dismissed with no order as to costs. K.B.N.            Appeals allowed. writ petitions dismissed. 697