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.".
|