P B SAMANT Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners who claim that they are social workers and except petitioner No. 3, all other petitioners have been Members of Legislative Assembly of Maharashtra in the past. It is averred that respondent No. 3 is a body set up by respondent No. 1 - Union of India which had published a booklet/ brochure in the name of "JAWAHARLAL NEHRU NATIONAL RENEWAL MISSION". Being interested in the welfare of the people of Maharashtra, the petitioners have filed this petition. According to the petitioners, the action of the respondents in adopting resolution of repealing the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Act") is in violation of the constitutional rights vested in the people of Maharashtra, more particularly as enumerated in Articles 14, 19(l)(g), 21,3 and 39 of the Constitution of India and respondent Nos. 1 to 4 are failing to perform their public duties. The State Government, in the Assembly agreed to repeal the said Act with respect to Greater Mumbai Pune and Thane within 1 and 1/2 years and signed a Memorandum dated 7th October, 2006 under the scheme of "Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission" (JNNURM). The resolution adopting repealment is primarily without legislative intent and without serving public purpose and is adopted only on the consideration that the installments agreed under the memorandum would be released by the Central Government in favour of State. The Resolution besides being unobjective also suffers from infirmities that the State Legislature had to pass the resolution in compliance with the provisions of the said Act and the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 which has not been passed in accordance with law and the rules of business of the Assembly and is stated to be a mere automatic consequences of a tripartite memorandum of agreement dated 7th October, 2006 wherein the State had given a solemn assurance that it would repeal the Act of 1976 before December, 2007. The challenge of the petitioners to the resolution of the State Government dated 16th April, 2007 is founded on the ground that the Central Government has power to give directions to the State Government as it may have power necessarily for carrying out the purpose of the Act or the Rules framed thereunder but it cannot direct the State Government to repeal an enactment merely because the Central Government can offer to and make a condition for giving monies upon compliance of such understanding. It is also averred by the petitioners that nearly 1221 acres of vacant land was acquired in the year 2006.

(2.) The petitioners had also filed a Writ petition earlier being Writ petition No. 4 of 2006 wherein the petitioners prayed for the following reliefs:-"

(3.) In the said writ petition, an order dated 17th August, 2006 was passed, which reads as under:-