Mahajan, C, J. - (1.) These appeals preferred on behalf of three zamindars of the State of Madhya Bharat against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature of that State dated 4-12-1952 raise common Constitutional questions and can be disposed of by one judgment. The State also preferred cross appeals against the same judgment. During the pendency of these appeals, two petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India were also made to this Court to obtain the same relief as was claimed by the appellants in their respective appeals. During the course of the arguments, the counsel appearing for the appellant in Civil Appeal No. 5 of 1953 asked leave to withdraw the appeal. This was granted and the appeal was dismissed as having been withdrawn. Petitions Nos. 116 and 117/1953 preferred under Article 32 were also withdrawn and were accordingly dismissed. Civil Appeals Nos. 4 and 6 of 1953 were argued before us and this judgment concerns them alone.
(2.) The Appellant in Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1953. Raj Rajendra Maloji Rao Shitole, is the proprietor of extensive landed properties in the State of Madhya Bharat comprising 260 villages under different 'Sanads' granted to his ancestors by the Rulers of Gwalior from time to time. It was alleged by him that his income from these properties was in the sum of Rs. 2,61,637 and that the State of Madhya Bharat, under purported exercise of its powers under S. 3, Madhya Bharat Abolition of Jagirs Act, was about to issue a Notification for resumption of all his land. By a petition dated 7-12-1951 preferred to the High Court he asked for a Mandamus to restrain the State from issuing any Notification under S. 3(1) of the Act in respect of his properties and from interfering with his rights in the said property. The appellant in Civil Appeal No. 6 of 1953 in another Jagirdar of the same State. He preferred a similar petition to the High Court praying for the same relief. These two petitions, along with a number of other petitions preferred under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the Madhya Bharat Abolition of Jagirs Act and praying for the issue of a Mandamus restraining the State from issuing the Notification under S. 3(1) of the said Act, were heard by a Bench of three Judges of the High Court of Madhya Bharat. The Court, by a majority judgment, declared that the Madhya Bharat Abolition of Jagirs Act No. 28 of 1951 was valid except as regards S. 4(1)(g), and sub-clauses (iv) and (v) of Cl. 4 of Sch. I which were held illegal and inoperative. A writ of Mandams was directed to be issued to the State Government directing it not to give effect to the provisions of the impugned Act stated above. Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was granted to the parties and in pursuance of the leave the appellants preferred the appeal above mentioned and the State preferred the two Cross Appeals. The Cross Appeals were not pressed by the learned Attorney-General and nothing more need be said about them. They are therefore dismissed with costs.
(3.) As regards Civil Appeals Nos. 4 and 6 of 1953, the facts are:That in April 1948 after the partition of India, and the formation of two Dominions, India and Pakistan, the Rulers of the States of Gwalior, Indore and certain other States in Central India being convinced that the welfare of the people of that region could best be secured by the establishment of a State comprising the territories of their respective States, with a common Executive, Legislature and Judiciary entered into an agreement for the formation of a United States of Gwalior, Indore and Malwa (Madhya Bharat). It was resolved by them to entrust to Constituent Assembly consisting of elected representatives of the people the drawing up of a democratic Constitution for the State within the framework of the Constitution of India to which the Rulers of these States had acceded. The covenant entered into by these Rulers was published on the 7th October 1948. The Rulers agreed, under Art. III of the Covenant, to elect a Rajpramukh of the United State, and by Art. VI the Ruler of each Covenanting State agreed to make over the administration of the State to the Rajpramukh not later than the first day of July 1948 and it was agreed that thereupon all rights, authority and jurisdiction belonging to the Ruler which appertain, or are incidental, to the Government of the Covenanting States shall vest in the United State and were thereafter to be exercisable only as provided by the Covenant or by the Constitution to be framed there under. By Article X it was agreed that as soon as practicable a Constituent Assembly for the purpose of framing a Constitution for the United State within the framework of the Covenant and the Constitution of India, was to be formed and Cl. (2) of the said Article provided: "The Rajpramukh shall constitute not later than the first day of August 1948 an interim Legislative Assembly for the United State in the manner indicated in Sch. IV." Schedule 4 laid down the following procedure for the constitution of the Legislative Assembly: "1. The Legislative Assembly shall consist of- (a) forty members elected by the members of the Gwalior Legislative Assembly; (b) fifteen members elected by the members of the Indore Legislative Assembly; and (c) twenty members elected by an electoral college to be constituted by the Rajpramukh in consultation with the Government of India to represent Covenanting States other than Gwalior and Indore. 2. The election shall be by proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote. 3. The Rajpramukh may made rules for carrying into effect the foregoing provisions of the Schedule and securing the due constitution of the interim Legislative Assembly.";