Author: Akshaya Singh,NBT Law College, Nashik affiliated to Pune University
SHORT SUMMARY
The Indian constitution is neither True Federalism like USA nor Unitary system like China, but it follows the system known as Quasi-federalism. The term ‘Quasi-federalism’ derived from Latin. The term of Quasi-federalism means sharing the powers between two governance.
According to the Article 3, 249, 254, and 356 gives extraordinary powers to the Central and at the same time Article 245, 246, 162, and 131 provides autonomy powers to the state. This system clearly views the insights of quasi-federalism.
As per Article 246, the powers are segregated as 3 lists, they are Union List – 100, State List – 61, and Concurrent List – 47, to maintain the federal balance. Concurrent List contains the subjects that both state and union can legislate, but state’s enactments must align with union.
According to Article 249, it empowers Rajya Sabha to pass a resolution to allows the parliament to legislate on State List.
ABSTRACT
In the Article 246(3), which deals with the State List there are 66 subjects are present. This state list can only be legislated by the state government, this considered as one of the major autonomy powers of the State government. But this autonomy power doesn’t explicitly stop union government from intervening the state subject.
As per Article 249, the Rajya Sabha have the power to pass a resolution, which gives authority to the parliament to legislate on the state list, but the condition is, in order to use Article 249, the subject has to be a part of National Interest.
Now the vital question is whether Subject 18, which is Land or Property of State can be used for the purpose of National Interest or not?. Is the focus of this article
STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs UNION OF INDIA (1963)
Case No : Orginal Suit No.1 of 1961
Court : Hon’ble Supreme Court
Bench : Bhuvneshwar.P, Sinha, Syed Jaffer Imam, J.C. Shah,
N.Rajagopala Ayyangar, J.R.Mudholkar
Petitioner : State of West Bengal
Respondent : Union of India
Judgement : 21/12/1962
FACTS OF THE CASE
In 1953, the West Bengal government enacted an Act, which is called the West Bengal Estates Acquisitions Act, 1953. This Act is considered as the tool to abolish Zamindari system and took control of the lands that are controlled by intermediaries.
But in 1957, the Parliament of India enacted Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, that grants power to the central to take control over the coal mines in the country, which is simply nationalization of coal mines.
Due to the implementation of CBA, Act 1957, the State of West Bengal lost its control over the coal mines in their territory. Losing its control over its own land became the core reason to file against the central, which is the base for this case.
ARGUMENTS
Contentions by Plaintiff (West Bengal):
The State of West Bengal asserted that, the parliament’s move to take control over the coal mines is against the core structure of Indian Federalism.
The state of West Bengal claims that, there is no specific provision to decide the control of state’s property.
If Union have the power to acquire property of state under Entry 42 of Concurrent List, then the state should also have similar power like union to re-acquire the property from the union.
The State of West Bengal states that Article 31 (Right to Property) is protecting the property rights, which cannot be violated by the union.
The State of West Bengal also claimed that according to Article 249, the union can only intervene in the state list when the subject is for the national Interest. The West Bengal questions how acquiring the state property serves National Interest.
The State of West Bengal Claimed that Entry 24 of State List gives general power to the state over industries. The union cannot use Entry 54 of Union List to acquire the property, since it is only for the development of Industrial activities.
The state of West Bengal also claims that this Act also affects state’s fiscal system.
Contentions of Respondent (Union of India):
The Union contented the argument of West Bengal as, the states In India is not fully sovereign. There are certain exceptions, where the state must be submissive to the union.
The Union of India claimed that the central used Entry 42 of 3rd list under seventh schedule, which is “acquisition and requisition of property”
The Union asserted that Entry 52 and 54 of the Union List under Seventh Schedule gives the power to regulate on Industries and Mines and acquisition and requisitioning of property.
The union claims that Article 31(2) explicitly mentions only private property not
State-owned property.
The Union declared the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 as it is constitutionally valid, since it deals with growth of the nation.
The union claimed that Entry 52 of Union List gives power to develop the industrial activities
ISSUES
Does Parliament of India have the authority to acquire the property rights or is it Ultra Vires of the states in India?
Do Entry 42 of Concurrent List have the power to acquire State-owned property?
Does Entry 52 of Union List, which deals with the development of Industries also grants power to acquire the States property?
Does Article 31, which is Right to Property is applicable to State property?
How taking control over the State property serves national Interest?
JUDGEMENT
The Supreme Court of India stated that the West Bengal’s enactment, that is West Bengal Estates Acquisitions Act, 1953 does apply to the coal-bearing areas, also at same time the SC clearly stated that the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, does that violates the core of constitution and also states that, this enactment is not Ultra Vires. The SC also held that the constitution is quasi-federal, which does not explicitly make the states sovereign. The SC also interprets the Entry 42 of Concurrent List (Acquisition and Requisitioning of property), that this entry does not mention only private, which concludes that Entry 42 is also applicable to public property.
The SC interprets the Entry 52 of Union List, as this entry deals with development of Industries, this explicitly also includes acquiring property for the development for public interest, so under this entry the union took control over the coal bearing areas.
The SC interprets the Article 31(2), which is Right to Property. The court states that Article 31(2) only deals with property rights of citizen, which is private property, so it doesn’t apply for state-owned property.
The court states that, the constitution does not limit the power of the parliament that comes under Entry 42 of Concurrent List. If the state’s decision does not match with central Union will prevail under Entry 42 of 3rd List.
The Apex court concluded by affirming the union government and stated that, the union doesn’t go beyond their powers (Ultra Virus). The Coal Bearing Areas Act, 1957 is constitutionally valid. Since the coal mines generate revenue to the nation, this explicitly consider as National Interest.
LEGAL JARGONS
ARTICLE 3:
This Article gives power to the parliament to alter or form new state.
ARTICLE 249:
This Article grants power to the parliament to legislate in the state list on the purpose of National Interest.
ARTICLE 254:
When the laws that enacted under concurrent list by the union or state, if it repugnant the central, the union will prevail
ARTICLE 356:
When the state encounters the failure of democratic machinery, the central will intervene by enforcing President Rule or State emergency.
ARTICLE 245:
The Parliament has the power to enforce the legislative power for the parliament and state legislature
ARTICLE 246:
This Article segregates the powers of the government into 3 Lists such as State List, Union list, Concurrent List.
ARTICLE 162:
This Article explicitly gives the states in India to frame and enact laws within its respective jurisdiction.
ARTICLE 131:
The Supreme Court have the power to act as a mediator between the State government and Central government to sort out the dispute.
ARTICLE 31(2):
This Article is the former fundamental right, which is Right to property. Article 31(2) states that, which forbids the government from owning the private property forcefully.
ENTRY 42 of Concurrent List:
This entry gives power to the state and the union, regarding taking the ownership or temporarily taking control of a property for public interest.
ENTRY 24 of State List:
This entry is a general rule for the state government to frame and enact laws for Industries in their respective jurisdiction.
ENTRY 52:
This entry gives power to the union to frame or enact laws for the development of specific Industries on the basis of public interest.
ENTRY 54:
This Entry deals with the power of Union to take control over specific mines for the development.
ULTRA VIRES:
When an authoritative person or organization acts beyond its power.
CONCLUSION
The State of West Bengal Vs Union of India (1963) not only deals with the conflict between the State and the Central for property rights, but also speaks the nuances of Quasi-Federal structure of the nation. This case also equally speaks about the autonomy and the adoption of eminent domain in the constitution.
Does the state have complete sovereign power over their property, or union’s legislation over state-owned property is valid? are the major doubt that arise from this case, which the supreme court extraordinarily explained the details.
This case law also clearly stated, that the states are submissive to the central, by affirming the union. The court interpreted the Entry 42 of Concurrent List extensively, which verified the action of union to take control over the property of both private and state-owned property for National interest. This case law once again proved the significance of central when it comes to national interest most importantly Industries and Minerals.
FAQS
How this case is a test to Indian Federalism
The focus or core of the case majorly deals with who is more strong legislative power the state or central.
What is the main provision that helped the central to acquire the State-owned property?
Entry 42 of Concurrent List which deals with “acquisition and requisitioning of property that gives power to both state and union to claim property for public purpose. But when both bodies have conflict, the union will prevail.
Does Article 31 protect the state-owned property?
The SC interpreted Article 31, that it only applies to the citizens property over forceful acquisition of property for public purpose not for state-owned property.
How SC ruling justified the authority of Union for acquiring the state-owned property by including the coal mines in National Interest?
The Entry 52 and 54 of Union List gives power to the union to make decisions on Industries and Mines matters, when it is considered for public purpose.
LEGAL REFERANCE:
State Of West Bengal vs Union Of India on 21 December, 1962
