P. Rajagopalan, J. - (1.) IN anticipation of the abolition of the zamindari estates and other estates as defined by Madras Act I of 1908 the Madras Legislature enacted the Madras Estates Land (Reduction of Rent) Act, 1947 (Act 30 of 1947) to relieve immediately the tenants in the estates of the burden of what were considered to be the excessive rents they were then paying the landholders. Subsequently the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (Act 26 of 1948) provided for the abolition of the estates themselves and for bringing those areas under the ryotwari system. A number of religious, educational and charitable institutions, to which we shall hereafter refer comprehensively as institutions or religious institutions, owned such estates, which had been granted in inam for the upkeep and maintenance of these institutions. Special provisions were made in both the Acts to maintain what was considered by the legislature to be a just balance between the interests of such public institutions and those of the tenants in the estates they owned. While the interests of the tenants were safeguarded on the same lines as those of the tenants in other types of estates, a more favourable treatment was accorded to the institutions, which owned inam estates, than to the landholders of the other abolished estates, obviously to provide against any undue diminution of the annual income which the institutions had been entitled to get from those inam estates before these tenancy laws were enacted. S. 5 of the Rent Reduction Act and S. of the Abolition Act were amongst such legislative provisions. It is enough to note at this stage that these provisions were not identical in their scope. S. 5 of the Rent Reduction Act, which applied also to estates other than inam estates was in force till the estates were notified and taken over by the Government under the Abolition Act. S. 38 of the Abolition Act which was confined to inam estates came into play after the estates vested in the Government.
(2.) THE common question that arises for determination in this batch of applications preferred under Art. 226 of the Constitution, for the issue of a writ of mandamus in each case to the Government to discharge their statutory obligations is, what is the scope of S. 38 of the Abolition Act and what is it that is payable to the institutions thereunder. The petitioner in W. P. No. 296 of 19571 was the erstwhile landholder of the Ramanathapuram zamindari estate. He was also the hereditary trustee of the religious and charitable institutions set out in schedules A and B appended to that petition. The inam estates owned by each of these institutions were also enumerated in the schedules. The petitioner filed a separate application with reference to each of these institutions and they formed the batch W. P. Nos. 296 to 363 of 1957. W. P. No. 1031 of 1956 was filed by the Raja of Sivaganga who was the hereditary trustee of the 84 religious and charitable institutions which were set out in the schedules to that petition together with the inam estates each of these institutions owned. It was common ground that the rents in these estates were reduced and that the notifications under the Rent Reduction Act were issued in 1949 -50. These notifications however took effect from 1 -7 -1947 in fasli 1357, as directed by S. 3(3) of the Rent Reduction Act. It was again common ground that all these estates were notified under the Abolition Act. Most of them vested in the Government with effect from 1 -10 -1951 in the course of fasli 1361.
(3.) S . 5 of the Rent Reduction Act was amended by Madras Act 29 of 1956, S. 1(2) of which directed that the amended S. 5 should be deemed to have come into force on 7 -1 -1948, when the Rent Reduction Act itself came into force. In view of that it may not be necessary to examine the difference between the scope of S. 5 as it was originally enacted, and that of S. 5 as it was amended. Sec. 5 as it now stands runs :;