Bhagwati. J. - (1.) These appeals by special leave and writ petitions represent a last but desperate attempt by the class of landholders in Andhra Pradesh to defeat an agrarian reform legislation enacted by the State for the benefit of the weaker sections of the community. It is indeed a matter of regret that a statute intended to strike at concentration of land in the hands of a few and to act as a great equaliser by reducing inequality in holding of land between the haves and the have-nots should have practically remained unimplemented for a period of over seven years. Unfortunately, this is the common fate of much of our social welfare legislation. We can boast of some of the finest legislative measures calculated to ameliorate the socio-economic conditions of the poor and the deprived and to reach social and economic justice to them, but regrettably, a large part of such legislation has remained merely on paper and the benefits of such legislation have not reached the common man to any appreciable extent. The Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act 1 of 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Andhra Pradesh Act) which is challenged in the present appeals was enacted by the Andhra Pradesh Legislature on 1st January, 1973. Soon after its enactment, the constitutions validity of the Andhra Pradesh Act was challenged before the Andhra Pradesh High Court on various grounds but a Full Bench of the High Court negatived the challenge and held the Andhra Pradesh Act to be constitutionally valid. Though this judgment was delivered by the High Court as early as 11th April, 1973, no effective steps for implementation of the Andhra Pradesh Act could be taken, since the Andhra Pradesh Act merely remained on the statute book and for some inexplicable reason it was not brought into force until 1st January, 1975. Even after the Andhra Pradesh Act was brought into force, not much enthusiasm was shown by the Government in implementing its provisions and in the meanwhile, it was found necessary to amend the legislation and hence the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Amendment Act, 1977 was enacted with retrospective effect from 1st January, 1975 and by this amending Act certain amendments were made which included inter alia the introduction of Section 4A. We shall presently refer to the relevant provisions of the amended Andhra Pradesh Act, but before we do so, it is necessary to point out that as soon as the amending Act was passed, another round of litigation was started by the landholders by filing writ petitions in the High Court challenging once again the constitutional validity of the Andhra Pradesh Act. There were several grounds on which the constitutional validity was challenged but the main ground was that by reason of the enactment of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act), the Andhra Pradesh Act had become void and inoperative. Certain other question involving the interpretation of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Act were also raised in some of the writ petitions, but they too need not be mentioned here, because in the course of the hearing we made it clear to the parties that we would examine only the constitutional validity of the Andhra Pradesh Act and other questions could be agitated by the landholders in the appeals filed by them against the orders determining surplus land. It was pointed out to us that some of the landholders had not filed appeals within the prescribed time and grave injustice would therefore result to them if these questions were not decided by us. But the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the State fairly stated before us that if appeals have been filed beyond time or are filed within a month of disposal of these appeals and writ petitions, the delay in filing the appeals would be condoned. Turning to the constitutional challenge, which in those days was required to be decided by a Full Bench of 5 Judges of the High Court, it was held that the enactment of the Central Act did not have the effect of invalidating the whole of the Andhra Pradesh Act, but since the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Act were repugnant to the provisions of the Central Act so far as concerned land satisfying both the definition of 'land' in the Andhra Pradesh Act and the definition of 'vacant land' in the Central Act, the Andhra Pradesh Act was held not applicable to 'vacant land' falling within the ambit of the Central Act. The High Court accordingly granted a declaration to this effect to the landholders, but save for this limited relief, dismissed the writ petitions in all other respects, since in the opinion of the High Court there was no substance in any of the other contentions raised on behalf of the landholders. The landholders thereupon preferred the present appeals after obtaining special leave from this Court. Writ petitions were also filed directly in this Court by some of the landholders.
(2.) The principal contention urged on behalf of the landholders in support of the appeals and writ petitions was that the Andh. Pra. Act was ultra vires and void as being outside the legislative competence of the Andhra Pradesh Legislature. This contention was based on two resolutions, one dated 7th April 1972 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Council and the other dated 8th April, 1972 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly under cl. (1) of Article 252 of the Constitution. This Article carves out an exception derogating from the normal distribution of legistive powers between the Union and the States under Article 246 and is in the following terms: "Art. 252 (1):If it appears to the legislatures of two or more States to be desirable that any of the matters with respect to which Parliament has no power to make laws for the States except as provided in Articles 249 and 250 should be regulated in such States by Parliament by law, and if resolutions to that effect are passed by all the Houses of the Legislatures of those States, it shall be lawful for Parliament to pass an Act for regulating that matter accordingly, and any Act so passed shall apply to such States and to any other State by which it is adopted afterwards by resolution passed in that behalf by the House or, where there are two Houses, by each of the Houses of the Legislature of that State. (2) An Act so passed by Parliament may be amended or repealed by an Act of Parliament passed or adopted in like manner but shall not, as respects any State to which it applies, be amended or repealed by an Act of the legislature of that State." The effect of passing of resolutions by the Houses of Legislature of two or more States under this constitutional provision is that Parliament which has otherwise no power to legislate with respect to a matter, except as provided in Articles 249 and 250, becomes entitled to legislate with respect to such matter and the State Legislatures passing the resolutions cease to have power to make law relating to that matter. The resolutions operate as abdication or surrender of the powers of the State Legislatures with respect to the matter which is the subject of the resolutions and such matter is placed entirely in the hands of Parliament and Parliament alone can then legislate with respect to it. It is if such matter is lifted out of List II and placed in List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. This would seem to be quite clear on a plain natural construction of the language of clauses (1) and (2) of Article 252 and no authority is necessary in support of it, but if any was wanted, it may be found in the decision of a Full Bench of five Judges of this Court in Union of India v. V. B. Chaudhary, (1979) 3 SCR 802-in fact the same Bench as the present one-where an identical view has been taken. It was in pursuance of clause (1) of this Article that a resolution was passed by the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Council on 7th April, 1972 to the effect that "the imposition of a ceiling on urban immoveable property and acquisition of such property and acquisition of such property in excess of the ceiling and all matters connected therewith or ancillary and incidental thereto should be regulated in the State of Andhra Pradesh by Parliament by law" and an identical resolution in the same terms was passed on the next day by the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly. Similar resolutions were also passed by the Houses of Legislature of some other States, though there is no material to show as to when they were passed. It was however common ground that at best some of these resolutions were passed prior to the enactment of the Andhra Pradesh Act. The result was that at the date when the Andhra Pradesh Act was enacted, Parliament alone was competent to legislate with respect to ceiling on urban immovable property and acquisition of such property in excess of the ceiling and all connected, ancilliary or incidental matters, and the Andhra Pradesh Legislature stood denuded of its power to legislate on that subject.
(3.) Now the Andhra Pradesh Act, as its long title shows, was enacted to consolidate and amend the law relating to the fixation of ceiling on agricultural holdings and taking over of surplus land and matters connected therewith. On its plain terms, it applies to land situate in any part of Andhra Pradesh. Sec. 3 (f) creates an artificial unit called 'family unit' by defining it as follows:;