MOGHU JAGOBAJI ZADE AND OTHERS Vs. TAHSILDAR, NAGPUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these cases the petitioners challenge the validity of the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act of 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioners are all non-tribais, who had purchased lands from the Tribals. Each one of them is required by notices to show cause why the lands so purchased by them should not be restored to the Tribal-transferor's under sections 3 or 4 of the Act. Rather than appear before the Sub-Divisional Officer and show cause, the petitioners approached this Court praying to quash such notices, on the ground that the Act is void being violative of the Constitutional provisions. During the pendency of proceedings, the Act has been included in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution by 40th Constitution Amendment Act of 1976. The learned Advocate General appearing for the State drew our attention to this and contended that with the inclusion of the Act in the Ninth Schedule, Rules in all these special Civil Applications and other Special Civil Applications are liable to be discharged.

(2.) Mr. M.S. Chaudhari, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners in Special Civil Applications Nos. 1909 of 1975, 153 of 1976 and 943 of 1976 and Mr. Madkholkar and Mr. Daga, learned Advocates appearing for the petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 1599 of 1976 raised several contentions apart from challenging the enactment by reference to the provisions in part III of the Constitution and contended that the Act is invalid. Mr. Natu, learned Advocate, sought leave to intervene in support of the contentions, saying that the same points arise in some of the petitions in which he appears.

(3.) The following points were raised before us in the course of their arguments by the learned Advocates.