Any State Enactment Related To Agricultural Land Tenures Is Special Law : Supreme Court Upholds Section 50(a) Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954

The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Section 50(a) of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954.

The bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath observed that any State enactment relating to Agricultural land tenures is a special law. The court noted that the 1954 Act deals with fragmentation, ceiling, and devolution of tenancy rights over agricultural holdings only,

Section 50

Section 50 provides that when a Bhumidhar or Asami being a male dies, his interest in his holding shall devolve in accordance with the order of the succession given below: a) Male lineal descendants in the male line of the descent: Provided that no member of this class shall inherit if any male descendant between him and the deceased is alive: Provided further that the son or sons of a predeceased on how low so ever shall inherit the share which would have devolved upon the deceased if he had been then alive: b) Widow c) Father d) Mother, being a widow; e) Step mother, being a widow; f) Father's father g) Father's mother, being a widow; h) Widow of a male lineal descendant in the male line of descent; i) Brother, being the son of same father as the deceased; j) Unmarried sister; k) Brother's son, the brother having been a son of the same father as the deceased; l) Father's father's son; m)Brother's son's son; n) Father's father's son's son; o) Daughter's son. This rule is further subject to the provisions of Section 48 and 52.

Background

Before the Delhi High Court following contentions were raised: (i) violation of Article 14; (ii) women being discriminated despite world over the rights of women were being empowered; (iii) Hindu Succession Act, 1956 would prevail over the 1954 Act. While dismissing the writ petition, the High Court noted that the Act had been placed in the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution much prior to the judgment in the case of Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala, and that Article 31(B) of the Constitution of India extends immunity to such legislation.

No question of repugnancy

Before the Apex Court, it was contended that the 1954 Act would be hit by Article 254 of the Constitution for the reason that the Hindu Succession Act 1956 Act is enacted by the Parliament whereas the 1954 Act is a State Act. It is also submitted that the 1956 Act is a special law and the 1954 Act a general law. In this regard, the court noted that 1954 Act is not referable to any matter enumerated in List III but it is referable to Entry 18 of List II. Thus, no question of repugnancy would arise in view of Article 254 of the Constitution.

State enactment relating to Agricultural land tenures is a special law

Another contention was that 1956 Act is a special law and 1954 is a general law. The court observed that any State enactment relating to Agricultural land tenures is a special law. The bench also rejected the contention re: Gender bias/ women empowerment, observing that there can be no challenge to the 1954 Act as the said legislation is included in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution.

"The reason is that the 1954 Act, as held above is a special law, dealing with fragmentation, ceiling, and devolution of tenancy rights over agricultural holdings only, whereas the 1956 Act is a general law, providing for succession to a Hindu by religion as stated in Section 2 thereof. The existence or absence of Section 4(2) in the 1956 Act would be immaterial.", the bench observed while dismissing the appeal.

Case details

Har Naraini Devi vs Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 783 | CA 22957 OF 2017 | 20 September 2022 | Justices Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath 

Headnotes

Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 ; Section 50(a) - Constitutional Validity upheld-  The Act is special law, dealing with fragmentation, ceiling, and devolution of tenancy rights over agricultural holdings only - The Contention re: Gender bias/ women empowerment rejected - There can be no challenge to the 1954 Act as the said legislation is included in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution.

Constitution of India, 1950 ; Article 254 - The question of repugnancy arises only if both the Parliament and the State legislature have made law with respect to any one of the matters enumerated in the Concurrent list (List III). (Para 18)

Legislation - Amendment - All amendments are deemed to apply prospectively unless expressly specified to apply retrospectively or intended to have been done so by the legislature. (Para 23)

Click here to Read/Download Judgment