STATE OF KERALA & Anr. v. THE GWALIOR RAYON SILK MANUFACTURING (WVG.) CO

. PALEKAR, J. All the above cases involve a challenged to the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act 26 of 1971 (herein after called the Act) on the ground that the Act as a whole was :Violative of Articles 14, 19(1) (f) (g) and 31 of the Constitution. A a Cl D ' • The lands involved are private forest lands situated in the former Malabar District which, after the States Re-organization Act, 1956, E stood transferred from the old. State of Madras to the new State of Kerala. As a result of the A.ct referred to above, these forest lands vest in the State, allegedly, as a measure of agrarian reform. The Writ Petitions are filed in this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution by several owners and/or lessees of large tracts of forest lands. The Civil Appeals are filed by the State of Kerala judgment and order of a full bench of the Kerala High Court (Reported in A.LR. 1973, Kerala 36) in petitions filed in that court challenging the Act. The High Court held that the provisions of the Act are not protected by Article 31A of the Constitution and accord ingly declared the Act as unconstitutional· and void. Thus in all proceedings now before us, which were argued together, the question involved is the validity of the Act. That will depend entirely on the G question whether the Act is protected by Articlle 31A(I) of Constitution. the F the . The conclusion of the High Court was expressed in the following words: "Having regard to our conclusions that forest lands in the State of Kerala, cannot generally be regarded as agri cultural lands and, therefore, cannot be the subject of agrarian reform and that the sclbeme of agrarian reform H A B c D E F G H KERALA v. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG. co. (Pa/ekar, J.) 6 7 5 envisaged by the impugned Act is not real or genuine but only illuory, we are of the opinion that the provisions of the Act ar~ not protected by Article 31A of the Constitution. We therefore declare the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act 26 of 1971 unconstitutional and void.'' It is contended on behalf of the State of Kerala that in order get the protection of Article 3 lA ( 1) (a) of the Constitution that the iaw must fulfil two conditions-( l) that It must relate to an estate as defined in Article 31A(2) (a) and (2) that the law mnst be one of agrarian reform. What is included in the expression "estate" is speci fied in sub-clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) of clause (2) of Article 31A and, since the sub·clauses are disjunctive, it will be enough for State to show that the law relates to land covered by an "estate" fall ing in at least <:me of the sub-clauses. It was submitted that the private forests in Malabar are held in janman right and hence they are an 'estate within the meaning of sub-clause (i). If the State further shows, he contended, that the law envisages a measure of agrarian reform it was not necessary for the State to establish additionally forest lands are similar to lands described in sub-clause (iii), that is to say, lands held or let for purposes of agriculture or for purposes ancillary tliereto. In $hort, in the submission on behalf of the State, the forest lands with which we are concerned are an 'estate' within the meaning of Article 31 A ( 2) (a)( i) of the Constitution and since section 10 of the impugned Act, inter alia, embodies a scheme of agrarian reform, the Act is valid. This will be the proper place to refer to the provisions of the Act. The Act is described as one to provide for the vesting in the Govern ment of private forests in the State of Kerala arid for the assignment thereof to agriculturists and agricultural labourers for cultivation. The preamble is as follows: "WFiEREAS the private forests in the State of Kernla are agri cultural lands; AND WHEREAS Government consider such agricultural lands should be so utilised as to increase the agricultural production in the State and to promote the welfare of the agriwltural population in the State; AND WHEREAS Government also consider that to give effect to the above objectives it is necessary that the private forests should vest in. the Government; BE it enacted etc. By Section 1 the Act is made to extend fu the whole of the State of Kerala and is deemed to have come into force on the 10th day of May, 1971. Section 2 gives some definitions. We are not concerned with all of them. Clause ( c) defines an owner as follows : " ( c) "owner" in relation to a private forest, includes a. mortgagee, lessee or other person having right to possession and enjoyment of the private forest." 15 7 (i S!!P"~F.~IE COURT REPORTS [ Dn ) 1 S.C.ll. Clause (f) defines ... private forest"". Private forest means.- A ( I) in relation to the Malabar district referred to in sub-section(2 l of section 5 of the States Re-organisation Act. 1956 (Central Act 37 of 1956).- (i) any land to which the Madras Preservation of Private Forests Act, 1949 (Madras Act XXVII of 1949), applied immediately before the appointed day excluding- B ( A) lands which are gardens or nil ams as defined in the Kerala Land Reforms Aq. 1963 (I of 1964); tea, (B) lands which arc used principally for the cultivation of coffee, cocoa. rubber, cardamom or cinnamon and lands used for any purp:Jse ancillary to the cultivation of rnch crops or for the prcpara· tlon of the same for the market. c (C) lands which are principally cultivated with cashew or other fruit-bearing trees or arc principally cultivated with any other agricul tural crop; and (D) sites of buildings and lands appurtenant to, and necessary for the convenient enjoyment _or use of, such buildings; (ii) any forest not owned by the Government, Madras Preservation of Private Forests Act, 1949, did not apply. including waste lands which are enclaves within wooded areas; to which (2) in relation to the remaining areas in the State of Kerala, any forest not owned by the Government, including waste lands which are cnclavCll within woo<Jed areas." Section 3 is important. "Private forests to vest in Government (!) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other time being in force, or in any contract or other document, but subject to the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3), with effect on and from the appointed. day, the ownership and possession of all private forests in the State of Kerala 'shall, by virtue of this Act, stand transferred to and vested in the Government free from all encumbrances, and the right, title and interest of the owner or any other person in any private forest shall stand extinguished." The appointed day means the 10th day of May, 1971. Sub-sections (2) to ( 4) of section 3 are !lOt rele vant for our present enquiry. Since some time lag between vesting and distribution under section 10 was inevitable, section 4 provided as follows: D E F G "4. Private forests to be dee.med to be reserved· forests-- All private forests vested in the Government under sub-section ( 1) of section 3 shall, so long as they remain vested in the Government, H be deemed to be reserved forests constituted under the Kerala Forest Act, 1961 (4 of 1962) and the provisions of that Act ~hall, so far as may be, apply to such private forests." A B c D E F KERALA Y.· GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG. co. (Palekar, /.) 677 Section 5 provides for eviction of persons in u~authorised ~u­ pation and section 6 for the demarcation of boundanes . of the pnvat~ forests. Section 7 provides for the constitution of Tribunals, their powers that "t~e and functions. Sub-clause (2) of that section provides Tribunal shall consist of a single person who is, or has been, or qualified to be appointed as, a District Judge." Section 8 provides that" "Where any dispute arises as to whether ( a) any land is a private forest or not; or ( b) any privat, forest or portion thereof has been vested in the Government or not, the person who claims that the land is not a private forest o_r that the Govern· the private forest has not vested in ment, may apply to the Tribunal for decision of the dispute. Sub-section (3) provides that "if the Tribu nal decides that any land is not a private forest or that a private forest or portion thereof has not vested in the Government, the custodian shall, as soon as may be, restore possession of such land or private forest or portion, as the case may be, to the person in possession appointed _day." immediately before thereof Section 9 provides that .. No compensation shall be payable for the vesting in the Government of any private forest or for the extinguish ment of the righi, title and interest of the owner or any other person in any private forest under sub-section(l) of swtion 3." . Having thus provided for ·acquisition of private forest lands with out the necessity to pay compensation the. Act now proceeds to pro vide for a scheme of agrarian reform. Section 10 Assignment of Private forests.-(!) The Govenuucnt shall, after reserving sucih extent of the private forests vested in the Government under sub-section ( 1) of section 3 or of the lands com prised in such private forests as may be necessary for purposes directed towards the promotion. of agriculture ·or the welfare of the agr; icultural population or for purposes ancillary thereto, a~sign on G .. registry or lease to-- (a) agriculturists; (b) agridultural labourers; . H ..( c) Members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who -are willing. to take up agriculture as means of their livelihood;_ ( d) unemployed young persons belonging to families of agriculturists and agricultural labourers, who have no sufficient means of livelihood and who are willing to take up agriculuture as means of their livelihood: 678 SUP:lEME COURT REPORTS [ 1974 J 1 s.c.R. .. . {e) labourers belonging to families of agriculturists and agricultural labourers, whose principal means of livelihood bef6re the appointed day was the income they obtained as wages for work in conection with or relate to private forests and who are willing to take up agriculture as means of their livelihood. the remaining private forests or the lands comprised in the private forests on such terms and subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed." "(2) The Government may, by notific; ition in the Gazette, dele gate their power under sub-section (1) to any officer· of the Govern m.ent or any class of officers of GoYernrnent, subject to such restric tions an~ control as may be specified in the notification." " ( 3) The extent of private forests or lands c:Pmprised in private forests /hich may be assigned to each of the categories of persons in sub-section( 1) and the order of preference in which assign· speeifie ment m~y be made shall be such as may be prescribed." Secµon 11 is important. It reads : "Assignment to be made within two years.-Assignment of the private forests or the lands cpmprised thcrciq under section 10 shall, as far as may be, be completed within two years from the date of publication of this Act in the Gazette." Section 12 deals with the powers of the Tribunals and the custo dian ,rind Section 13 bars the jurisdiction of civil courts. ' Section 15 reads : "Constitution of Agriculturists Welfare Fund.- (1) A fund called the Agriculturists Welfare Fund shall be consti tuted by the Government to be ~tilised for the settltement. and welfare of persons to whom private forests or lands comprised in private forests have been assigned under section 10 and shall be administered in such manner as may be prescribed." "(2) The Fund referred to in sub-section (1) shall consist of grants or Joans by or frorn the Government and monies received by the Government by the 1ale of trees standing in such portion of the private forests as are or inay be assigned under section 10". Section 17 provides for the rules making power of tlie Govern- 1nent. A c D E F By the repealing section 18 several Acts have been repealed includ ing the Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Ordinance. 1971 which had been promulgated prior to this Act. In short the Aat purports to acquire forest lands without payment of compensation for. implementing a scheme of agrarian reform by assigning lands on registry or by way of lease to the poorer sections oi the rural agricultural population. This is done after reserving por tions of the forests as may be necessary for purposes "directed· towards the promotion of agriculture or the welfare of the agricultural popu lation or for purposes ancillary thereto." This scheme of agrarian reform is intended to be completed within two years. G H A B c KERALA v. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG. co. (Palekar, 1.) 679 Mr: Chagla, who addressed us the principal argument in this c_ase on behalf of the owners, contended that private forests could not be convened into agricultural lands by a mere legislative fiat contained in the Preamble of the Act, because forest lands are lands in which forests grow spontaneously and naturally without human effort or skill and are quite distinct from agricultural lands, which, however defined, must contain the element of tilling the soil for sowing and planting. He pointed out that in sulxlause (iii) of Article 31A (2)(a) a forest land may be regarded as an agricultural land only when that land is held or let for purposes of agriculture or for pur poses ancillary thereto in which case a forest land may be included in the definition of the word 'estate'. It was not shown that vast areas of private forests which are now in the possession of the owners and the lssees thereof were held or let for purposes of agriculture and hence they cannot be regarded aSt an 'estate' within the definition. That alone according to Mr. Chagla deprived the Act of the protection under Article 3 lA (!). Secondly, assuming that forest lands are 'estate' within the definition, he further contended that their acquisition was not for implementing any scheme of agrarian reform but for a col the State by lateral purpose, namely, to increase the revenues of exploiting the forest wealth of the lands by selling valuable timber naturally growing in_ them. Since the Preamble to the impugned Act affirms that piivate forests in the State of Kerala are 'agricultural lands' and there is no definition of what is meant by 'agricultural lands' in the Act itself, we 'agricultural shall have to consider in what sense the expression lands' has been used in the Act. It is conceded by learned Advocate General for the State of Kerala that a mere recital in Preamble, although admissible, will not be conclusive of facts. But he submits that courts should show decent respect to such an affirmation of fact because the legislature of a State is presumed know the character of the lands situated in the State, tenure under which they are held, the use and abuse to which they are put and the manner in which such natural resources of the State are best utilized for the benefit of the community. He. submits that this affirm ation in the Preamble is not irresponsibly made and that the expres sion 'agricultural lands' has been used in a special sense having regard to the uses_ to whi~h. the.se forest lands have been put over · genera ~1ons. In his suC.m1ss1on forest lands in Kerala are agric'ultural lands m the sense that they are capable of being used for raising food crops. cash crops, plants or trees and other purposes of husbandry. The statement of .objects and reasons in ·the Act contains following : ''There are vast extents of private forests in the State partic.ularly . m. the Malabar area w~ere such forests are owned by J anmies. These pnvate forests are agricultural lands. In the Judgment 1969 K.L.T. 320 (V. V,e~~gopala Varma Rajaa v. Controller of !'state Duty, Kerala) a d1y1S1on ~nch of the High Court has held that m the absence of excepuonal circumstances such as the land being reported D E F G H 680 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ H74 J 1 s.c.R. entirely rocky and barren for other reasons, all forests lands in the State are agricultural lands in the sense that they can be prudently and profitably exploited for agriculturing purposes." Reference may also be made in this connection to some . of passages in the affidavit filed by Shri K. Viswanathan Nair, Joint Secretary to Government of Kerala, Law Department, in thii connec tion. In para 4 of his affidavit he says, "Approximately 28 per cent of the (otal land area in· the Kerala State constitutes forest lands. Gene rally forest lands comprised in the erstwhile native Stat~ of T ravan- core and Cochin area are owned by Government, whereas that of the erstwhile Malabar District of Madras Presidency belonged partly, to private individuals and partly to the State Government. It was esti mated that the total extent of private forests in Malabar area would come to about 1,200 sq. miles, i.e. about 7 .5 lakh acres ...... As per the Survey conducted by the Madras Government in the year 1945. private forest lands in Malabar area, the extent of whic)J was found to he 1,200 sq. miles tnen, belonged to 116 private individuals, extent owned by them varying from 100 acres to 1,00,000 acres.•· Then he proceeds to say, "the forest lands in Kerala are agricultural lands and can be put to cultivation of various food and cash crops: Cultivation of forest lands will increase the agricultural production in the State and will also provide means of livelihood to landless agricul· should be tural labourers. The Government considered snch lands distributed to those persons for purposes of agriculture and that the private ensure effective and proper distribution of such forests should be vested in the Government." lands, Then at para 19 he states as follows : A B c D E lands on which "It is also pertinent to place before this Hon'ble Court the fact that in large tracts of areas which had been already clear-felled by food-crops owners of the private forests or their contractors, coffee, cocoanut. pepper, etc .. have been raised converting them into such food crop plantations. Even planting teak and other plantation these are crops is agricultural operation and the planted are agricultural It ,ds. After assignment of private forests from the jenmies or after trespassing into the private forests, forests numbers of settlers of the poor classes have dear-felled the including dense forest areas and have cultivated food crops therein. Plantatioils like tea, coffee, rubber, teak and cardamom have been raised in the private forests by the rich planters. In other places after · clear-felling the forests, cocoanut, areca, tapioca and other cultivations G have been raised, the yield of which is found to be considerably high when compared to the other areas of the State. Similarly, coffee, pepper. and rubber plantations have been successful in the Wynad (Malabar District)". forest lands F A fact to which attention must be drawn is that that whereas a large proportion of the forests in the former Travancore Cochin State H belonged to the Gove.rnment and only a small proportion to private owners or janmies, the position in the Malabar District was just opposite. Forest lands in that District belonged predominantly KERALA v. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG. co. (Paiekar, /.) 681 A B c D E private owners or janmies Many of these private owners were heads of· Hindu Religious Endowments. A committee known as the Kutti Krishna Menon Committee had been appointed for recommending the unification of laws relating to Hindu Religious Endowments Madras State and that Committe~, in one place of its report, sug gested-and this is referred to in the affidavit-as follows : "74. We would suggest that the large areas of virgin forest lands available within some of the Devaswoms may be utilized for plantation of cocoanut, arecanut, pepper, cashew, rubber, etc." The Malabar Tenancy Act, 1929 as •mended in 1951, contained the following provision : "52.(1) The State Government or such officer as they may autho· rise in this behalf may by order require the landlord of any waste or forest land to lease it for agricultural purposes to such person such term subject to such conditions and within such times as may be specified in the order." By reason of the increasing population of the area, and conse· quent pressure on land, there was widespread squatting by agrict:l turists in forest areas where trees were cut and large blocks were brought under the plough. The former State of Travancore and Cochin bowed to the inevitable by regularising the occupation by un authorised settlers and issued orders for settling agriculturists on land in the forests which could be put to agriculturnl use. In this connec· !ion the· affidavit says : "Forest lands in the Travancore-Cochin area of the State, which are Government Reserve Forests have been widely used since Jong past for agriculture and purposes ancillary thereto by persons to whom these lands were a~signed by the State· and by large numbers of en croachers. Use of these lands for agricultural purposes on a large scale has been adverted to, in the Report of the Sub-Committee on the eviction of encroachers from the forest lands in the State cif Kerala, to which also this respondent craves leave to refer in detail at the hearing. The Government is currently distributing 3 acres of forest lands for settlement of agriculturists." G H Reference was also made to the report of the Special Officer Shri K. Anantan Pillai w~o was asked to prepare a list of_ arable lands in the reserve forests of the former Travancore and Cochin suitable for cultivation. That report was made in 1969. The extracts from his report .are given in the affidavit and they show to what extent lands in the Government reserve forests were made available to . hungry ·The officer says "Now that the agriculturists for food production. position of food supplies is far more serious and the scope for finding employment for a very large number of people is getting more and more limited, one of the possible alternate solutions will be to take a fairly big slice of cultivable land from the Government assignment to these people, With. this object in view, I have inspected forests 682 SUU.EME COURT REPORTS , [ 1974 J 1 s.c,R. them. these lauds in all these divisions and I have prepared a list of areas considered suitable for cultivation, details of which are furnished." After furnishing the details the Officer says : "The present attempt is to find out suitable cultivable lands in the reserve area and to. give the land on a systematic basis. With this view in mind I have tried to find out suitable areas preferably in large blocks. This will help the formation of fairly large sized colonies or villages so allottees can have a social life and in course of time all the facilities If a large block is for communal living can be provided to taken, normally because of the nature of land in our State a few steep hills cannot be excluded. The colony can be formed on the base of these hills in fairly elevated places and it can be-so arranged that the individual families will have their residences at convenient places (within two or three miles) in relation to the area he is given cultivation. .Some of the blocks I have pointed out are fairly large areas where even small townships can· be formed: This will aid the formation of cooperative societies to help the a!lottees in bo!h their cultivation and in constructing suitable/ building them." This shows how tha Special Officer felt the need of settling chunks· of the agricultural population in blocks of reserve forests and envisaged the formation of large blocks in the forest area so that in the neighbour hood. and on the slopes of the hills villages and even small townships could be built.. The Officer was chiefly concerned with the reserve forests in the Kerala State. But in his report he also referred to the In that connection he says private forests in· th.e Malabar District. "AJ:lart from this I understand that extensive areas of private forests are available in the Malabar Districts. They can also be acquired and distributed." · the expresSion goes, forming part of the State of Kerala. It must be remembered that what is stated generally about nature of the reserve forest lands in the old State or Travancore Cochin. applies equally to the private forest lands of Malabar District because all these forests are contiguous and form one long belt of a mountainous terrain_;now It will be thus seen that .all forest lands, whether reserve or private, have the settlement of agriculturists been applied for generations for whether such settlements were authorised for una)Ithorised. Vast areas in the forests were clear.felled, as bringingl>patches and blocks of lands under agriculture:;, Several types of produce were obtained by agriculture and a large population lives on the same. Plantations of coffee, tea, rubber, cardamom and the In recent like were grown on an extensive scale in years Industrialists have taken leases of vast areas of forests from their owne.rs and a f<action of the same has been brought under cultivation by planting encalyptus and other types of trees useful for paper and other industries. Large areas in these forests seem to be eve.n now in their pristine form but are capable of being utilized by ablorbing a large proportion of the population by settling them . on the land. These forests, therefore, have attained a peculiar- character owing to their geography and climate and the evidence availabfo to us ·shows that vast areas of these forests are still capable of support ing a large agricultural population. The several authoritative reports forests. 8 c D E F G H A B c D E F G H KERALA v. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG. co. (Palekar, J.) 683 to which reference was made in the affidavit were made available to us and the extracts therefrom were read out at the time of the argu ment. They seem to support what a bench of the Kerala High Court said in V. Venugopala Varma Rajaa v. Controller of Estate Duty, Ker!lla(') in para 6 of the judgment. "It is well-known extensive areas of different varieties of plantations that we have got in this State were once forest lands; and it is also equally well-known that year after year large areas of forest lands in this State are being In the absence of cleared and converted into valuable plantations. exceptional circumstances such as the land being entirely rocky or barre:i for other reasons, all forest lands in this State are agricultural lands in the sense that they can be prudently and profitably exploited for agricultural purposes." This judicial opinion as we have already seen has been referred to in the Statement of Objects and Re_asons of It is, therefore, maajfest that when the legislature stated ·in the Act. the Preamble that the private forests are agricultural land, they merely· wanted to convey that they ru:e lands which by and large could be prudently and profitably exploited for agricultural purposes. Having appreciated the true nature and character of these private forests we. have to see whether they can be regarded as 'estate' within the contemplation of Article 31A the Constitution. That Article is as follows : (2) of "3 lA. (a) the expression "estate" shall, in . relation to any local areas, hav~ the same meaning as that expression or its local equivalr.nt has in the existing law · relating land . tenures in force in that area and shall also include- ( i) any jagir, inam or maufi or other similar grant and j a mm an in. the States of Madras and Kerala, any right; (ii) any land held under ryotwari settlement; (iii) any land held or let for purposes of agriculture or for purposes ancillary thereto, including waste land, forest land, land for :Pasture or sites of buildings and other structures occupied by cultivators of land, agricultural labourers and village artisans; . (b), The expression "rights", in relation to an estate, sh!1'1 include any ri(!h!s vesting in a proprietor, sub-pro pnetor, under-propnetor, (raiyat, under raiyat) or other intermediary and any rights or privileges in respect of land revenue." tenure-holder, 'estate' is an The definition of In sub clauses (i), (ii) and (iii) certain categories of rights and lands are incl~ed in the definition of the word 'estate'. It is the contention on behalf of the Kerala State that these forest lands which are held in janmam right fall squarely under sub-elause (i). Since janmam right to these lands is in an 'estate' it could be acquired by the State· inclusive definition. (I) [1969] K. L. T. 230. 684 S'jPREME COURT REPORTS l 1974 J 1 s.c.R. under Article 3 IA (a) (1 J (a). There is force this contention. Janman rights in the Sttaes of Madras and Kerala are, as explained by Sobba Rao, J. in Kavalappara Kottarathil Kochuni and others v. The .Stare of Madra• and others(!) rights of hereditary proprietorship in land. These rights, like the rights created by grant of jagir or inam relating to land, which included agricultural lands or waste lands -Or forests and hills (See : State of U.P. v. Raja Anand Brahma Shah) ( 2 ), are brought within the definition of the word 'estate', and are, thtrefore, liable to be acquired by the State under Article 31A(l )(a). It i:; not disputed that ali the private forests with which we are now concerned nre held in Janmam right. Janmam rights being an 'estate' are liaplc to be acquired by the State under Article 31A(l) (a) as a necessary step to the implementation~of agrarian reform. Section 3 of the impugned Act vests the ownership and possession o~ all private forests in the State. Therefore they woo.Id attract The pro· It would not be, in such a case, neces· tection of Article 31A(l). sary to further examine if the lands so vested in the Government are agricultural lands falling within sub-clause (iii). This is explained in some detail by this Court in Balmadies Plantations · Ltd. v. State of Taniil Nadu(') in para 15 at page 147. A B c D Indeed this does not mean that the State is absolved from show· In faet ing that the acquisition is for the purpose of agrarian reform. in Balmadies case, referred to above, the acquisition of forests owned by janmies was set aside on the sole ground that the impugned law or the material on record did not indicate that the transfer of forests from the janmies to the Government was linked in any way with a scheme of agrarian reform or betterment of village economy. What then is the scheme of agrarian reform <lnvisaged in the im pugned Act? The title of 'the Act shows that it is an act to provide for the vesting in the Government of private forests for the assign· ment thereof to ' agriculturists and agricultural labourers for cultiva· tion. The Preamble shows that such private forests which the legis· lature thought. to be agricultural lands in the sense, already explained, should be so utilised as to increase their. agricultural production in the State and to promo'e the welfare of the agricultural population in the State.. It is further stated in the Preamble that in order to give effect to the above objects it was necessary that the private forests should vest in the Government. T~e objectives of agricultural production and the promotion of the welfare of the agri- G cultural population are clearly a predominant e~ement in agrariar/' re form. How these objectives are to be implemented are generalty stated in sections 10 and 11. All the private forests. after certain to agriculturists or agricultural reservations, . are to be assigned. lab<Jurers al!d to the poorer classes of the )11ral population desirina bo11a fide to take up agriculture as a means of their livelihood. Tbe · reservation in respect of certain portions of the ·forests is also made increasing the · 11 F (I) [1960] 3 S. C. R. 887. m [l'mJ 's. c. c. m. C") !_1%7] I S. C.R. 361. KERALA \', GWALIOR RAYON SILK 11FG. co. (Palekar, J.) (i85 A B c D E F G H in the interest of the agricultural population because the section says that the reservations will be such as may be necessary for purpos~s directed towards the promotion of agriculture or welfare of th~ agn thereto. S~chon 11 cultur .ii population or·for purposes ancillary further provides that after making the necessary reserva_t1011s .scheme for the assignment of the private forests to the vanous bene ficiaries described in se~tion 10 shall, as far, as may be be, completed within two years from the date of the publication of the Act. The conditions and restrictions under which the assignments are to. take place have to b_> prescribed by rules. We understand that in view of the stay _granted by the courts, the rules- have not been framed. But it is clear that the rules will have to be framed forthwith because of the urgency of the matter as seen in section 11 and these rules will undoubtedly unfold the details of the scheme generally envisaged in section 10. lu statutes of will have to be consistent with the purposes of the Act. this nature, provision can only be generally made indicate b10ad details of the scheme for agrarian reform and that is what is done in the Act. referred to above no such 'cheme had been envisaged. But in another case namely the Kannan Devan Hills Produce v. The State af Kera/a and another(!) Statute viz. The Kannan Devan Hills (Resumption of Lands) Act 5 . of 1971 disclosed a scheme in section 9 which is very _similar to our own section 10 of the impugned Act. Section 9 of that Act was as follows : It would not be necessary to emphasize that the In Balmadies case "9. Assignment of lands.-(1) The Government shall, after reserving such extent of the lands, the possession of which has vested in the Government under sub-clause (1) of section 3 .............. , as may be necessary . purposes directed towards the promotion of agriculture or the welfare of the agricultural population to be settled on such lands, assign on registry the remaining lands to agri· culturists and agricultural labourers in such manner, on such terms and subject to such conditions and restrictions, may be prescribed." That scheme as envisaged in this section was upheld by this Court as a scheme for agrarian reform and we do not see any good reason why we should take a different view with regard to the scheme envisaged in section. 10 of the impugned Act. The lfigh Court thought that the scheme was not real or genuine' but il.lusory and ha:i given some reason~ in para 12 of the judgment why 1t took that view. The r~asons given do not stand scrutiny. <;>ne reason was that whereas !n the Kannan Devan Hills (Resump tion of Lands) Act, 1971 Section 9 provided for only assignment on registry of. the lands. in secti?n 10 of the impugned Act forest lands are intended to be assigned both on registry and bv wm· of 01i the lease. Excep•ion is taken to assignments by way of. lease ground that the lessee does not get any fixity of tenure. Rules are to (I) (1972] 2 S. C C 21S. 686 SiJ~REME COURT REPORTS · [ 1974] 1 5.C.R. ·be still framed and it would be too early now to say what conditions and restrictions will be imposed, in the· leases. Moreover, assuming that there is no fixity. of tenure, that would. not mean that leases in favour of agriculturists or agricultural labourers are not part of agrarian reform. The point is that forest lands, overgrown by shrubs. and jungle growth, will have to be cleared in the first instance-before the land is made cultivable; and after the land is ·made cultivable agricultural produce will be grown there by some lessee or the other. Assuming any particular lessee's tenure is not fixed, ,tha~ would_ not mean that the land will remain fallow. Other agriculturists will ~tep into the shoes of the lessee and the process of growing agrWultural produce will continue in the interest of the grower and the agricultural community as a whole. The other reason given is that there is no provision ·.Vith regard to trees in the forest resetve under section 10' .and a suspicion is expressed that the Government may appropriate to itself the value of the trees. Mention is made that even a single. It seems, how log of ro~e wood fetches a' price of Rs. 40,000/-. ever, to have escaped the notice of the High Court that the reserve portions of the forests under section 10 are clearly earmarked in the section itself for purposes directed towards the. promotion of agri culture or the welfare of the agricultural population or for purposes ancillary thereto. There is, therefore, no foundation for the suspicion that valuable trees which form part of the resei:ve private forests are liable to be appropriated for purposes other than those specifically mentioned in that section. Section 15 provides for the constitution of the Agriculturists Welfare Fund and this relates to the price of registry or given on lease. trees standing in the lands assigned on That fund, according to sub-clause (2) shall consist of grants and loans by or from the Government and. monies received by the Govern ment by the sale of trees standing in such portions of the ,private forests as are or may be assigned under section 10. No such furid is created for the purpose of the trees standing in the reserve area. But that does not mean that the value of the trees in the reserve area can be utilized for purposes other than those specifically mentioned jn section 10. That will be part of the scheme and Government will have to take adequate provision as to. how the value of the trees. can be utilized for purposes directed towards the promotion of agriculture or welfare of the agricultural population or for purposes ancillary therto. Another objection was that assignment of land without demarca tion and survey was impracticable and productive of. strift: .. We do not see why assignment of land is impracticable in the absence of survey.. Even before the introduction of the survey, Ian<is had been assigned and cultivated by agricultunsts. The process of assignment must involve demarcation of lhe land assigned. Sub-section (3) of section 10 says "the extent of private forests or lands comprised in private forests which may be assigned to each of the categories of persons specified in sub-section ( 1) and the order of preference which assignment may be made shall be such as may be prescribed." land to be assigned, the land, After determining the extent of the A B c D E F G H \ 8 C D F (J 11 KERALA \', GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG. co. (Palekar, J.) 687 when assigned, will have to be inevitably demarcated by the officers who make the assignment. That is not an insuperable difficulty. A.< a matter of fact we know from the affidavit on behalf of .the Govern ment that about 3 lakh acres of forests land have been already dis tributed. Indeed steps should be taken for an early survey in the interests of law and order. But survey is not the sine-qua-non of any "Cnuine scheme for distribution of land. We .do not think that the High Court has given any substantial reasons for coming to the. con clusion that the scheme of agrarian reforril is a"teasing illusion and a promise in un-reality." In an attempt to show that the impugned Act was a piece of colourable legislation, reference was made to the Kerala Private Forests Acquisition Bill, 1968 L.A. Bill No. 33 of 1968 which pro- vided for the acquisition of priva•e forests on payment of compensa tion for the acquisition. That Bill, it is contended, was allowed to lapse and the present Act was en1cted with the obvious intention of expropriating vast forest lands without paying compensation. We can hardly countenance such an argument. The question really is, in the first place, of the competence of the legislature to pass the im· pugned Act and, in the second, whether the Act is constitutional in the sense that it is protected by section 3IA(1). So far as the com petence of the legislature is concerned, no objection is made before us. As to its constitutionality we have shown that the .Act purports to vest the janmam rights to the forests in the Government as a step If this conld be constitu in the implementation of agrarian reform. tionally done by the legislature, the fact that at an earlier stage the owners of private forests is of little consequence. The dominant pnr pose of the impugned Act, as already pointed out, is to distribute reservations of forest lands for agricultural purposes after making portions of the forests for the benefit of the agricultural community. The fear is expressed that such a course if, genuinely implemented. may lead to deforestation on a large scale leading to soil erosion and to be detri· silting of rivers and streams and will actually turn out mental to the interests of the agricultural community in the long run. It is undoubtedly true that rackless deforestation might lead to very unhappy results. But we have no material before us for expressing opinion on such a ma•ter. It is for the legislature to balance the com parative advautages of a scheme like the one envisaged in the Act against the possible disadvantages of resulting deforestation. There are many imponderables to which we have no safe guides. It is presumed that the legislature knows the needs of i•s people and will balance the If there is present advantages against possible futnre disadvantages. pressure on land and the legislature feels that forest lands in some areas can be conveniently and, without much damage to . the com munity as a whole, utilized for settling a large proportion of the agri cultural population, it is perfectly ooen, under the constitutional . powers vested in the legislature, to make a suitab'e law; and law is constitutionally valid this Court can hardlv strike it down on the ground that in the long. run the legislation instead of turning .out to be a boon will ~ out to be a curse . E Government was toying with the ide~ of paying compensation . 4.- 392SupCI/74 688 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1974 l I s.c.R. itself Mr. Menon who appeared for the respondent in Civil Appeal No. J 398 /72 put forward a pica of equitaole estoppel peculiar to his client company. It appears that the Company , established Kerala for the production of rayon cloth pulp on an understa .. ding ', that the Government would bind itself to supply the raw-meterial. ' Later Government was . unable to supply the meterial and by an agreement undertook not to legislate for the acquisition of private forests for a period of 60 years if the Company purchased forest lands for the, purpose of its supply of raw-materials. According.y, the Company' purchased 30,000 acres of private forests from the Nilabhuri Kovila Kannan estate for Rs. 7 5 /- and, therefore, it was argued tha;, so far as the company is concerned, the agreement not to legislate should operate as equitable estoppel against the State. We do not see how an agreement of the Govern ment can preclude legistation on the subject. The High Court has rightly ·pointed out that the surrender by the Government of its legislative powers to be used for pubiic good cannot avail the com pany or operate against the Government as equitable estoppel. lalchs In the result the appeals are allowed and the Writ Petitions dis It is declared that th~ Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and missed. Assignment) Act, 1971 is constitutionally valid· There shall be no order as to costs. KRISHNA IYER, J. The holding and the reasons expressed in the leading opinion happily coincide with ours. Nevertheless, the prob lems raised and the points debated bear upon such seminal issues that some supplementary observations from us may not be superero gatory. Certain Owners of vast extents of private forests aggrieved by the deprivtaion, without compensation, of their ownership under the Kerala Private_ Forests (Vesting & Assignment) Act, 1971 (Act 26 of 1971) (heremafter ::ailed, for short, the Forest Act) challenged its vires under art. 226 of the Constitution on the score that it violated their fundamental rights under arts. 14, 19 and 31 and was not imm.unised by art. 31A from the lethal sting of art. 13. The High Court upheld the attack and voided the statute. The defeated State has sought in appeal to sustain the constitutionality of the law while others who have suffered by the operation of the statute have come up driectly to this Court under art. 32. The impugned Act vests in the State lands of these latifundists. littlest compensation, and the issue is whether the wings of art. 3 lA are wide enough and the provisions of the Forest Act fair enough for the Court to grant constitutional shelter. refusing any flatly The State wields the shield ()f art. 3 lA to ward off the private owners' sword thrust of art. 13 read with arts. 14, 19 and ~ L We must examine the application of art· 31 A to the Forest Act. A B c )) } F J-1 A B c D E F G H KERALA v. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG. co. (Krishna Iyer, /.) 68 9 Any Jaw providing for the acquisition b)' the State of an 'estate' is saved by art 3 lA subject to certain conditions, violation of arts. 14, 19 and 31 notwithstanding. Sub-article (2) explains the con cept of 'estate' and includes therein janrnam rights. Although art. 31A is worded widely enough to rope in acquisition of any estate by the State regardless of purpose, the Supreme Court has cut back on this amplitude by limiting entitlement to constitutional protecnon to agrarian reform legislation only. Subba Rao, J., in Kochuni's( 1) ease, speaking for the Court, reviewed the earlier decisions under art· 3 JA and interpreted the provision against the back-drop of the Objects of the Constitution lForth Amendment) Act, 1955 and the earlier Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, to arrive at the conclusion that art. 3 lA was meant "to facilitate agranan reforms". Thls Court in the aforesaid decision struck down the Madras Marurnakkathayarn (Removal of Doubts) Act, 195:!, because "the impugned Act does not effectuate any agrarian reforms and regulate the· rights inter-se between tenants." Art. 3 lA deprives citizens of their fundamental rights and such an article cannot be extended, by interpretation, to overreach the object implicit in the article, observed Subba Rao, J., and this judicial gloss has come to stay· Forensic debate has since centred round what is agrarian reform, and counsel here have joined issue on the claim of the Forest Act to wear this protective IJlantle. landlords and Article 31 A having been read down to relate to agrarian rcform rightly, if we may say so--in the ferudal context of the country and the founding faith in modernisation ot agriculture infonned by distributive justice, the controversy in the present ease demands a study of anatomy and cardiology of the statute, not its fonnal structure but its heart beats. What do we mean by agrarian reform? The genesis of the con cerned constitutional amendments, and· the current economic think ing must legitimately illuinine the meaning, along with lexicographic aids and judicial precedents. "We must never forget it is a COnstitu tion we are expounding." The seventies of our century pour new life into old coni:epis and judges must have the feel of if. So viewed the te, chnology of agrarian reform ·for a developing country which traditionally lives in its villages envisages the national programmes of transmuting rural life from feudal medievalism into equal, affluent modercism-a wide canvass· overflowing mere improvement· of agri- culture and reform of the land system. · (I) [1960] 3 S. C.R. 887 - 690 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1974) 1 S.C.R. The cGnaept of agrarian reform is a complex and dynamic one reorganisation of the promoting wider interests than conventional It is intended to realise the land system or distribution of land. social function of the land and includes we are merely giving, by reforni way of illustration, a few familiar proposals of agrarian creatiou of economic .units of rural production, establishment of adequate credit system, implementation of modren production techni· ques, construction of irrigation adequate drain.age, making available and other methods of intensifying and increasing agricultural production, providing readily available means of communication and transportation, to facilitate proper marketing of the village produce, putting up of silos, ware for preserving produce and houses etc. to the extent ne; essary handling it so as to bring it conveniently within the reaoh of consumers when they need it, training of village youth in modem agricultural practices with a view to maximising production and help solve social problems that are found in relation to the life of the agricultural community. The village man, his welfare, is the target. systems and fungicides fertilizers, A c Moving the first constitution Amendment Bill, the then Prime Minister, who was in a large sense the protagonist of constitution -framing for the country, observed: D "Now apart from our commitment, a survey of the world today, a survey of Asia today will lead any intel'.igent person to see that the basic and the primary problem is the land problem today in Asia, as in India. And every day of delay adds to the. difficulties and dangers,, apart from being an injustice in itself." " ..... But inevitably, in big social changes some people have to suffer. We have too think in terms of large schemes of social engineerin!!, not pett}" reforms but of big schemes like that." At the end of an extensive debate he again emphasized : "May I remind the House that this question of land reform is most intimately connected with food production. We talk about food production and grow-more-food and if there is agrarian tronble and insecurity of land tenure nobody knows what is to happen. Neither the zamindar nor the tenant can devote his energies to food production because there is instability." This reference to the aoposite parliamentary debate reveals the reform' special significance and extensive connotation of Indeed, art. 31A(2)(iii) itself in its aoolication to Indian conditions. by referring to land for pasture and sites of buildinl!S and other structures oecuoied bv cultivators, agricultural labourers and village artlsans gives clear hints of agrarian well·bein!l beinl! oivotal to land reform in it~ lareer legitimate cannotation. Al!licultural economists have focussed attentirm on the need of under-develnoed countries to upgrade the standard of living of village communities by resort 'aorarian E F G II KER.~LA v. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG. co. (Krishna Iyer, J.)591 to schemes for increasing food producti;>n and reorganising the laDd system. The main features of the agrarian situation in India aDd in other like countries are the gross inequality . in land ownership, the d1Sinoentives to production and the desperate backwardness of rural life. As Gne Latin American has stated( 1) : "Agrarian reform ought to be an inseparable part of an agr1cU1tural policy wn1ch furthers the adva..'lce of that in harmony with overall aspect of economic activity economic development. Agrarian reform likewise pursues social and politici\,l ·ends congruent with economic goals, such as the cultural elevation of the peasants, their liberation their group from a vestiges of feudalism, solidarity, and t)ieir participation in public life through the mechanism of democracy." their well-being, It is thus clear to those who understand developmental dialectic and rural planning that agrarian reform is more humanist than mere land reform and, scientifically viewed, covers not merely abolition of intermedairy tenures, zamindaris and the like but restructuring of village life itself taking in its broad embrace the socio-economic regeneration of the rural population. The Indian Constitution is social instrument with an economic mission and the sense and a sweep of its prnvisions must be gathered by judicial statesmen on that seminal footing. Indeed, the decisions of this Court cited at the bar adopt this meaningfully latitudinarian approach and we may briefiy them here. In Ranjit Singh's(') case, a semantic liberaljsm suggestive of a iJimpse of the new h~rizons and a touch of the winds of cha,~ is read into the idea of agrarian reform. Hidayatullah, J., quoted a significant passage from Ram Narain Medhi v. State of Bombay,(') which runs thus : "With a view to achieve the obective of establishing a socialistic pattern of society in the State within the meaning of Atticles 38 and 39 of the Constitution, a further measure of agrarian reform was enacted by the State Legislature, being the impugned Act, hereinafter referred to, which was desi~ed to bring ab0ut such distribution of ownership and to subserve the control of common good thus concentration of wealth eliminating and means of production to the common deteriment." agricultural as best Inde~d. the ,'earned Judg 0 struck the trne national note, if we may say so, with great respect, when he observed(2) "The scheme of rural development envisages not only equitable distribution of land so that there is no undue imbalance in society resulting in a landless class on : (I) 1964-65 (Vol. SO) IOWA Law Review, S29. (2) [196S] I S. C. R. 82, 94. (3) [1959] St•pp. IS. C.R. 489. B c D E F G H 692 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1974] 1 S.C.R. assignment of lands the one had and a concentration of land in the hands of a few on. the other, but env~ages also the raising of econo!lllc standards and bettering rural health and social conditions. Provisions for the village pl!Ilchayat for the use of the general community or for hospitals schools, manure pits, tanning grounds 'etc. enure for the benefit of rur.tl population must be considered to Le an essential part of the redistribution of holdings and If open . lands to which no objection is apparently taken. agranan reforms are to succeed, mere distribution of land to th~ landless is not enough. There must be a proper plannmg of rural economy and oonditions and a body like the village panchayat is best desi.2I1ed to promote rural wel fare than individual owners of small portions of lands." reform. It is arguable In Raja Anand's(') case, Silai J., after holding the forests and waste lands in that" case fell within the definition of 'estate' proceeded to take the view that acquiring the many square miles of forests in that case being in the nature of a necessary step in the implementation of agrarian reforms was impregnably insulated by article 31A. The sheer extinguishment of certain types of land grants and hereditary holdings may, in given circumstances, without more, constitute steps in aid of agrarian the- elimination of ancient janmam may per se be regarded as possessing the attribute of agrarian reform because to wipe out feudal vestiges from countryside and to streamline land ownership are preliminaries t.o the projetcion of a socialistic order which part IV and art. 3 !A of the Constitution strive to create. However, this COurt has ruled in Balmadies Plantations Ltd. v. Stare of Tamil Nadu( 2) and decision binds us that a scheme of agrarian reform is essential, apart In the from taking over of janman rights, present case a concrete agrarian project is presented by section 10 of ·the Forest Act- A substantially similar programme was con sidered by this Court in Kannan Devan's(•) case and approved as sufficient to impart to the statute invulnerability under art. 31A. Notwithstanding the attempt of counsel distinguish between the Kannan Devan provisions and section 10 the distinction is without a difference. Once we accept the thesis that developmental orientation and distributive justice are part of and inspire activist agrarian reform, its sweep and reach mnst extend to cover the needs of . the village community as well. What l'f&' gramme of agrarian reform should be initiated to satisfy the require ment of rural uplift in a particular community under the prevailing circumstances is a matter for legislative jnd~ent. Here, in field the legislature is the oo!icy maker and the court cannot assume the role of an economic adviser or censor competent to pronounc" whether a particular programme of agrarian reform is good or bad from the point of view of the needs of the community. The sole to make the law valid. the forest owners, (I) [1967] I S. C. R. 362. (2) [1972] 2 S. C. C. 133. (3) [1972] 2 S- C. C- 218. .\ B L I> E I G ' .... A 11 c 0 E F G II KERALA v. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG. co. (Krishna Iyer, 1.) 693 issue for the Court is whether it is in fact a scheme of agrarian reform, and if 1t is, the prudence or folly thereof falls outside the orbit of judicial review being a blend of policy, politics and economics ordi narily beyond the expertise and proper function of the court. We may, however, point out here that in ascertaining whether the impugned enactment outlines a blueprint for agrarian reform the Court will look to the substance of the statutory proposal and not its mere outward form. The Court will closely study to seei if the legislation merely wears the mask of agrarian reform or it is in reality such. A label cannot salvage a statute from the clutches of constitutional limitations if the agrarian reform envisaged by it is "a teasing illusion or promise of unreality." The Court should not be too gullible to accept a scheme of agrarian reform when it is nothing but a verbal substerfuge, but at the same time the Court should not be too astute to reject such a scheme because it is not satisfied with the wisdom of the scheme or its technical soundness. Can the State take over an industrial unit or a business undertaking without payment of compensation and claim the protection of art. 31 A by stating that the profit arising from snch industrial nnit or business undertaking would be utilised for purposes directed agriculture or welfare of the rural population? Such an acquisition would obviously not be an acquisition for carrying out a scheme o[ agrarian reform because there will be no direct nexus between subject-matter acquired and its utilisation for agrarian reform. would not be enough meerly to say that the income of the property acquired is to be utilised for purposes of agrarian reform. The property itself must be acquired . for carrying out such a reform· This requirement is satisfied in the present case because reserved under s. 10 are to be utilised "for purposes directed to the agricultural promotion of agriculture or for tho welfare of the population or for purposes ancillary thereto." We do not think would hav~ been sufficient merely to provide that the income from the produce of the forests shall be utilised for promotion of agri culture or the welfare of the agricultural population, but the forest lands need not be so utilised. That would have been merely a devise for augruenling the revenues of the State· though with a direction that such addition to the revenue shall be expended only on PUl"Jl06"..S of promotion of agriculture or the welfare of the agricultural popu lation. But here it is clear on a reading of s. 10" that the forests and not merely the income are to be devoted to or directed towards the promotion of agriculture or the welfare of agricultural pooulation or for ancillary uses closely related to agrarian reform. The details of the scheme of agrarian reform to which the acquired forests would be subiected cannot obviously be embOOied tht{ statue and they are left to be provided by rules which are to be mad<.l the provisions of under s. 17 for the purpose of carrying out statute. No rules could so fat be made bv the State Government, it is said, because there-was a stay against the implementation of the Act when the petition was pending in the Kerala High Court and thereafter the Act was declnred to be ultra vires and void bv judgment of the Kerala High CouFt which is under appeal before forest 694 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1974 J 1 s.c.R. us. Now that the Act is being declared by us as oonstitutionally valid the State Government will have to make rules setting out the preci;e programme of agraian reform which is intended to be c~ed out. Counsel for the forest owners has expressed an apprehension before us that the State Government m1y keep the forests lS are for a Jong number of years and namely go on augmenting revenues of the state by cutting and selling timber growing on them and thereby defeat the rationale of art. 31A itself. But there is no basis or justification for this apprehension because we are of the view that the agrnrian project would have to be spelt out concretely by the State Government within the prescribed period of two years or at If the State Govern any rate within a reasonable time thereafter. ment merely goes on making money by cutting and selling the timber grown on the forests without implementing the definite proposals of agrarian reform contemplated in s. 10 within a reasonable period of time, it would be a subversion of the statute and in such a case it would be competent to the aggrieved parties to take legal action com pelling the State to make good the statutory promise and to act In terms of s. 1 O. 11nd if the forests are diverted for uses outside scope of s.10 the court could restrain the State from such illegitimate adventures. While a straight case of mala /ides vitiating the legislation has not been set up. an article in the Malayam press by the Chief Minister has been relied on to make out that agrarian reform was more a cloak than the real intent The Chief Minister's literary contribution cannot necessarily bind_ the State, although his statement may h~p build a case of colourable legislat:on. which has not been urged here. Moreover, the article doe~ not advance the case of the petitioners for it envisages a real proiect for rural regeneration and better produc tion. It is good to remind ourselves what colourable legislation means in constitutional law. Reference may be made to the decis:on of this Court in Ga;anathi Naravan Der> v. State of Orissa(I) Where doctrine was discussed. Mukherjee, J ., clarified the law thus : "It may be made clear at the outset that the dectrine of colourable legislation does not involve any question of bona fide.v or mala fides on the part of the legislature. The whole doctrine resolves itself into the question competency of a narticular lel!islature to enact a particular Ja·.v. If the legislature is competent to pass a particular law, the motives which imvelled it to act are really irrelevant. On the other hand if the legislature lacks comvetency, the question of mot; ves does not arise at all. Whether a statute is consti tutional or not is thus always a question of power. . . The idea conveyed bv the expression is that a lthovgh aminrently a legislature in passing a statute purported to act ·within the (I) [1954] s. C. R. I, 10-11. E F. G I{ A 8 c D E F G' H KERALA v. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG. co. (Krishna Iyer, I.) 695 limits of its powers, yet in substance and in reality it trans· gressed those powers, the transgression being veiled by what appears, on proper examination, to be a mere pretence or disguise." Tht. Forest Act survives legislation. the attack on the score of colourablc Considered in this light it is not possible to hold that s. 10 has no nexus with agrarian settlement. Of course, the programme held oilt in the provision, if not implemented within a reasonable time or otherwise peverted to non-agrarian purposes, may give rise to judicial scepticism about the Government's bona {ides and induce consequent remedial action. As we see it, the Forest Act is calculated to bring benefit to landless labourers, tribals and other proletarian groups the over·popu!ated state of Kerala. The fear that the executive will dawdle and delay unreasonably or act obliquely to defeat the agrarian welfare content of the measure may gain credibility when the scheme is not legislatively time·bound. In the present case a two-year period for reserving forestrs and distributing the rest is written into the statute itself. If the State, for ulterior ends, prevaricates or betrays scheme by non-implementation or mis·implementation an aggrieved party may seek relief through a judicial post·audit. The Court is not altogether powerless in such a case, in the light of the observations made by Sikri, C.J., in Kannan Devan's ( 1) case that : "If the State were to use lands for purposes which have no direct connection with the promotion of agriculture or welfare of agricultural population the State could be res· trained from using the lands for those purposes. Any fanci· ful connection with these purposes would not be enough." Moreover, the executive is not wholly unaccountable to the nation merely because the law bas been judicially cleared once. A grievance has been made by the writ petitioners extensive forest lands are being confiscated without a paisa of com pensation while the timber itself will be worth crores. In Khajamian Wakf Estates v. State of Madras,('), Hegde, J., was pressed with the contention that art. 31 A does not protect a legislation where no com~nsation whatsoever hip been provided when taking the estate. The Court, however, did not decide the question. We, on our part, do not think there is any merit in it. Once we find the legislative area barricaded by art. 3 lA, it cannot be breached by arts. 14, 19 and 31 and judicial break-in is constitutionally intedicted. But, at the same time, we must hasten to point out that art. 3 lA is no charter of legis lative freedom to refuse compensation altogether in every c'lSe. The Court may not strike down a statute for non·payment of compensa tion but the legislature is expected, except in exceptional socio·histori cal setting, to provide just payment for the deprived persons. To exclude judicial review is not to black out the beneficent provisions of (I) [1972] 2 S. C. C. 218. (?) [1971] 2 s. c. R. 891). 696 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1974] 1 s.c.R. arts. 14, 19 and 31. May be the present-legislation dealing with exten sive antiquated janmam rights relates to the exceptional category. All that we can say is that this is an area where not the court but the elector is the prope•· corrective instrument. For these and other reasons already mentioned leading judgment of our learned brother, Mr. Justice Palekar, we agree the appeals be allowed and the writ petitions be dismissed with no order as to costs. .\ B K.B.N. Appeals allowed. Writ petitions dismissed.