THE
CONSTITUTION (FOURTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 1955
Statement of Objects and Reasons
appended to THE CONSTITUTION (Fourth Amendment) Bill, 1954 which was enacted as the
Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1954
STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS
This Bill seeks to amend
articles 31, 31A and 305 of, and the Ninth Schedule to, the Constitution.
2. Recent
decisions of the Supreme Court have given a very wide meaning to clauses (1) and (2) of
article 31. Despite the difference in the wording of the two clauses, they are regarded as
dealing with the same subject. The deprivation of property referred to in clause (1) is to
be construed in the widest sense as including any curtailment of a right to property. Even
where it is caused by a purely regulatory provision of law and is not accompanied by an
acquisition or taking possession of that or any other property right by the State, the
law, in order to be valid according to these decisions, has to provide for compensation
under clause (2) of the article. It is considered necessary, therefore, to re-state more
precisely the State's power of compulsory acquisition and requisitioning of private
property and distinguish it from cases where the operation of regulatory or prohibitory
laws of the State results in "deprivation of property". This is sought to be
done in clause 2 of the Bill.
3. It will
be recalled that the zamindari abolition laws which came first in our programme of social
welfare legislation were attacked by the interests affected mainly with reference to
articles 14, 19 and 31, and that in order to put an end to the dilatory and wasteful
litigation and place these laws above challenge in the courts, articles 31A and 31B and
the Ninth Schedule were enacted by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act. Subsequent
judicial decisions interpreting articles 14, 19 and 31 have raised serious difficulties in
the way of the Union and the States putting through other and equally important social
welfare legislation on the desired lines, e.g., the following:-
(i) While
the abolition of zamindaris and the numerous intermediaries between the State and the
tiller of the soil has been achieved for the most part, our next objectives in land reform
are the fixing of limits to the extent of agricultural land that may be owned or occupied
by any person, the disposal of any land held in excess of the prescribed maximum and the
further modification of the rights of land owners and tenants in agricultural holdings.
(ii) The
proper planning of urban and rural areas require the beneficial utilisation of vacant and
waste lands and the clearance of slum areas.
(iii) In the
interest of national economy the State should have full control over the mineral and oil
resources of the country, including in particular, the power to cancel or modify the terms
and conditions of prospecting licenses, mining leases and similar agreements. This is also
necessary in relation to public utility undertakings which supply power, light or water to
the public under licenses granted by the State.
(iv) It is
often necessary to take over under State management for a temporary period a commercial or
industrial undertaking or other property in the public interest or in order to secure the
better management of the undertaking or property. Laws providing for such temporary
transference to State management should be permissible under the Constitution.
(v) The
reforms in company law now under contemplation, like the progressive elimination of the
managing agency system, provision for the compulsory amalgamation of two or more companies
in the national interest, the transfer of an undertaking from one company to another,
etc., require to be placed above challenge.
It is
accordingly proposed in clause 3 of the Bill to extend the scope of article 31A so as to
cover these categories of essential welfare legislation.
4. As a
corollary to the proposed amendment of article 31A, it is propsed in clause 5 of the Bill
to include in the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution two more State Acts and four Central
Acts which fall within the scope of sub-clauses (d) and (f) of clause (1) of the revised
article 31A. The effect will be their complete, retrospective validation under the
provisions of article 31B.
5. A recent
judgment of the Supreme Court in Saghir Ahmed v. the State of U.P. has raised the question
whether an Act providing for a State monopoly in a particular trade or business conflicts
with the freedom of trade and commerce guaranteed by article 301, but left the question
undecided. Clause (6) of article 19 was amended by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act
in order to take such State monopolies out of the purview of sub-clause (g) of clause (1)
of that article, but no corresponding provision was made in Part XIII of the Constitution
with reference to the opening words of article 301. It apears from the judgment of the
Supreme Court that notwithstanding the clear authority of Parliament or of a State
Legislature to introduce State monopoly in a particular sphere of trade or commerce, the
law might have to be justified before the courts as being "in the public
interest" under article 301 or as amounting to a "reasonable restriction"
under article 304(b). It is considered that any such question ought to be left to the
final decision of the Legislatue. Clause 4 of the Bill accordingly proposes an amendment
of article 305 to make this clear.
NEW DELHI;
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU.
The 17th
December, 1954.
Statement of
Objects and Reasons appended to THE CONSTITUTION (Fourth Amendment) Bill, 1954 which was
enacted as the Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1954
STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS
This Bill
seeks to amend articles 31, 31A and 305 of, and the Ninth Schedule to, the Constitution.
2. Recent
decisions of the Supreme Court have given a very wide meaning to clauses (1) and (2) of
article 31. Despite the difference in the wording of the two clauses, they are regarded as
dealing with the same subject. The deprivation of property referred to in clause (1) is to
be construed in the widest sense as including any curtailment of a right to property. Even
where it is caused by a purely regulatory provision of law and is not accompanied by an
acquisition or taking possession of that or any other property right by the State, the
law, in order to be valid according to these decisions, has to provide for compensation
under clause (2) of the article. It is considered necessary, therefore, to re-state more
precisely the State's power of compulsory acquisition and requisitioning of private
property and distinguish it from cases where the operation of regulatory or prohibitory
laws of the State results in "deprivation of property". This is sought to be
done in clause 2 of the Bill.
3. It will
be recalled that the zamindari abolition laws which came first in our programme of social
welfare legislation were attacked by the interests affected mainly with reference to
articles 14, 19 and 31, and that in order to put an end to the dilatory and wasteful
litigation and place these laws above challenge in the courts, articles 31A and 31B and
the Ninth Schedule were enacted by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act. Subsequent
judicial decisions interpreting articles 14, 19 and 31 have raised serious difficulties in
the way of the Union and the States putting through other and equally important social
welfare legislation on the desired lines, e.g., the following:-
(i) While
the abolition of zamindaris and the numerous intermediaries between the State and the
tiller of the soil has been achieved for the most part, our next objectives in land reform
are the fixing of limits to the extent of agricultural land that may be owned or occupied
by any person, the disposal of any land held in excess of the prescribed maximum and the
further modification of the rights of land owners and tenants in agricultural holdings.
(ii) The
proper planning of urban and rural areas require the beneficial utilisation of vacant and
waste lands and the clearance of slum areas.
(iii) In the
interest of national economy the State should have full control over the mineral and oil
resources of the country, including in particular, the power to cancel or modify the terms
and conditions of prospecting licenses, mining leases and similar agreements. This is also
necessary in relation to public utility undertakings which supply power, light or water to
the public under licenses granted by the State.
(iv) It is
often necessary to take over under State management for a temporary period a commercial or
industrial undertaking or other property in the public interest or in order to secure the
better management of the undertaking or property. Laws providing for such temporary
transference to State management should be permissible under the Constitution.
(v) The
reforms in company law now under contemplation, like the progressive elimination of the
managing agency system, provision for the compulsory amalgamation of two or more companies
in the national interest, the transfer of an undertaking from one company to another,
etc., require to be placed above challenge.
It is
accordingly proposed in clause 3 of the Bill to extend the scope of article 31A so as to
cover these categories of essential welfare legislation.
4. As a
corollary to the proposed amendment of article 31A, it is propsed in clause 5 of the Bill
to include in the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution two more State Acts and four Central
Acts which fall within the scope of sub-clauses (d) and (f) of clause (1) of the revised
article 31A. The effect will be their complete, retrospective validation under the
provisions of article 31B.
5. A recent
judgment of the Supreme Court in Saghir Ahmed v. the State of U.P. has raised the question
whether an Act providing for a State monopoly in a particular trade or business conflicts
with the freedom of trade and commerce guaranteed by article 301, but left the question
undecided. Clause (6) of article 19 was amended by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act
in order to take such State monopolies out of the purview of sub-clause (g) of clause (1)
of that article, but no corresponding provision was made in Part XIII of the Constitution
with reference to the opening words of article 301. It apears from the judgment of the
Supreme Court that notwithstanding the clear authority of Parliament or of a State
Legislature to introduce State monopoly in a particular sphere of trade or commerce, the
law might have to be justified before the courts as being "in the public
interest" under article 301 or as amounting to a "reasonable restriction"
under article 304(b). It is considered that any such question ought to be left to the
final decision of the Legislatue. Clause 4 of the Bill accordingly proposes an amendment
of article 305 to make this clear.
NEW DELHI;
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU.
The 17th
December, 1954.
THE
CONSTITUTION (FOURTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 1955
[27th April,
1955.]
An Act
further to amend the Constitution of India.
BE it
enacted by Parliament in the Sixth Year of the Republic of India as follow:-
1. Short
title.-This Act may be called the Constitution (Forth Amendment) Act, 1955.
2. Amendment
of article 31.-In article 31 of the Constitution, for clause (2), the following clauses
shall be substituted, namely:---
"(2) No
property shall be compulsorily acquired or requisitioned save for a public purpose and
save by authority of a law which provides for compensation for the property so acquired or
requisitioned and either fixes the amount of the compensation or specifies the principles
on which, and the manner in which, the compensation is to be determined and given; and no
such law shall be called in question in any court on the ground that the compensation
provided by that law is not adequate.
(2A) Where a
law does not provide for the transfer of the ownership or right to possession of any
property to the State or to a corporation owned or controlled by the State, it shall not
be deemed to provide for the compulsory acquisition or requisitioning of property,
notwithstanding that it deprives any person of his property.".
3. Amendment
of article 31A.-In article 31A of the Constitution,--
(a) for
clause (1), the following clause shall be, and shall be deemed always to have been,
substituted, namely:-
"(1)
Notwithstanding anything contained in article 13, no law providing for-
(a) the
acquisition by the State of any estate or of any rights therein or the extinguishment or
modification of any such rights, or
(b) the
taking over of the management of any property by the State for a limited period either in
the public interest or in order to secure the proper management of the property, or
(c) the
amalgamation of two or more corporations either in the public interest or in order to
secure the proper management of any of the corporations, or
(d) the
extinguishment or modification of any rights of managing agents, secretaries and
treasurers, managing directors, directors or managers of corporations, or of any voting
rights of shareholders thereof, or
(e) the
extinguishment or modification of any rights accruing by virtue of any agreement, lease or
licence for the purpose of searching for, or winning, any mineral or mineral oil, or the
premature termination or cancellation of any such agreement, lease or licence,
shall be
deemed to be void on the ground that it is inconsistent with, or takes away or abridges
any of the rights conferred by article 14, article 19 or article 31:
Provided
that where such law is a law made by the Legislature of a State, the provisions of this
article shall not apply thereto unless such law, having been reserved for the
consideration of the President, has received his assent."; and
(b) in
clause (2),-
(i) in
sub-clause (a), after the word "grant", the words "and in the States of
Madras and Travancore-Cochin, any janman right" shall be, and shall be deemed always
to have been, inserted; and
(ii) in
sub-clause (b), after the word "tenure-holder", the words "raiyat,
under-raiyat" shall be, and shall be deemed always to have been, inserted.
4.
Substitution of new article for article 305.-For article 305 of the Constitution, the
following article shall be substituted, namely:-
"305.
Saving of existing laws and laws providing for State mono- polies.-Nothing in articles 301
and 303 shall affect the provisions of any existing law except in so far as the President
may by order otherwise direct; and nothing in article 301 shall affect the operation of
any law made before the commencement of the Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1955, in
so far as it relates to, or prevent Parliament or the Legislature of a State from making
any law relating to, any such matter as is referred to in sub-clause (ii) of clause (6) of
article 19.".
5. Amendment
of the Ninth Schedule.-In the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution, after entry 13, the
following entries shall be added, namely:---
"14.
The Bihar Displaced Persons Rehabilitation (Acquisition of Land) Act, 1950 (Bihar Act
XXXVIII of 1950).
15. The
United Provinces Land Acquisition (Rehabilitation of Re- fugees) Act, 1948 (U.P. Act XXVI
1948).
16. The
Resettlement of Displaced Persons (Land Acquisition) Act, 1948 (Act LX of 1948).
17. Sections
52A to 52G of the Insurance Act, 1938 (Act IV of 1938), as inserted by section 42 of the
Insurance (Amendment) Act, 1950 (Act XLVII of 1950).
18. The
Railway Companies (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1951 (Act LI of 1951).
19. Chapter
III-A of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 (Act LXV of 1951), as
inserted by section 13 of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 1953
(Act XXVI of 1953).
20. The West
Bengal Land Development and Planning Act, 1948 (West Bengal Act XXI of 1948), as amended
by West Bengal Act XXIX of 1951.". |