Wanchoo, C.J. - (1.) These are 210 applications under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging the validity of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, (No. 6) of 1952 as amended by The Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs (Amendment) Act (No. 13) of 1954 (hereinafter to be referred together as the Act). We propose to deal with them by one judgment as the points raised in these cases are common.
(2.) The cases may be divided into two broad groups. The first group consists of what may be called ordinary jagirdari cases. The rights of the applicants in these cases arise from grants by the Rulers of the covenanting States. The second group of cases are Bhomichara and Bhomat cases, and it is said that the rights of the applicants in these cases did not arise out of any grant by the Rulers.
(3.) We do not think it necessary to set out the allegations in the various applications in detail. It would, in our opinion, be enough to indicate the points on the basis of which the validity of the Act is being challenged, particularly as learned counsel appearing for the applicants have only addressed us on those points and on no others. These points are: (1) Article 31-A of the Constitution has no application to this Act, and therefore it is open to the applicants to challenge the validity of the Act on the ground that it infringes the fundamental rights of the applicants; (2) The Act is discriminatory, and is therefore hit by Article 14 of the Constitution; (3) The compensation provided in the Act is not fair or just compensation, and the Act is therefore Kit by Article 31(2) of the Constitution; (4) The Act is beyond the competence of the Rajasthan Legislature, and is therefore invalid; (5) The assent of the President of India was not properly obtained, and therefore the Act is not valid in view of Article 31(3) and the proviso of Article 31A(1) of the Constitution; (6) There is no public purpose behind the Act, and it is therefore invalid; and (7) The Act takes away the ancient rights of the applicants, and is, therefore, invalid.;