fbpx

Collectors Land in Mumbai and Transfers

January 4, 2023

      An interesting question was asked on Twitter on collectors’ land. The question was whether it is legal to ask for transfer charges by Collector Mumbai for issuing NOC of flats in Society standing on land belonging to Collector? In Mumbai Collector owns nearly 1282 properties on which development is permitted and sanctioned on Lease. As per the latest data available about 517 properties’ Lease has been expired and in Mumbai leases of about 149 properties have been expired. The government has given this land on meager yearly lease rent. So the Government prescribed a policy for the increase in ground rent on 5th October 1999. Which was challenged and directions were given to give a hearing to those whose lease has been expired and also give an opportunity to convert occupancy to Class II occupants on one-time payments as specified in the Circular. The lease of land for purposes other than Agriculture is granted under provisions inter-alia of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (“ Said Code” ) and the Maharashtra Land Revenue (Disposal of Government Lands) Rules, 1971 ( Said “ Rules”) . The Said Rule B-26 -27 empowers Collector to Grant Land for Residential use. It reads as under B. Grant of land for residential use 26. Disposal of building sites :- (1) Except as otherwise provided in these rules, the occupancy rights in building sites shall be disposed of by the Collector under Section 20 read with Section 31 by publication to the highest bidder, unless for reasons to be recorded in writing, the Collector thinks that in any particular case, there is reason for granting the land without auction. (2) Where a building site is to be disposed of without auction under sub-rule(1), the Collector shall dispose of the site in occupancy right under Section 20 read with Section 31 on inalienable tenure  [If the occupancy price determined under sub-rule(3) does not exceed Rs. 25,000 and with sanction of the Commissioner, if the occupancy price exceeds Rs. 25,000 but does not exceeds Rs. 1,00,000 and with the sanction of the State Government, in other cases.] (3) The Collector shall determine the occupancy price of the site, regard being had to the following factors that is to say, (a) the sale prices of similar lands in the locality; (b) the situation of the building site; (c) the availability of, and demand for, similar lands; (d) factors which are taken into account in determining the value of land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 27. Grant of land housing schemes :-Building plots may be granted by the State Government for various housing schemes undertaken by any housing board, local authority or co-operative housing society constituted under any law for the time being in force, in occupancy rights under Section 40 on inalienable and impartible tenure on payment of such concessional occupancy price as the State Government may, from time to time fix, regard being had to the nature of the scheme, and in the case of a co-operative housing society, to the income of the members, thereof, such income being ascertained after making such inquiries […]

Read more

CAN SOCIETY CHARGE MAINTENANCE CHARGES ON AREA WISE BY WHICH LARGER FLAT OWNERS CONTRIBUTE A LESSER AMOUNT THAN SMALLER UNITS?

September 30, 2022

  Nowadays an ultra-vires method of chargability has been adopted by several societies. The committee uses its majority power and misguides the General Body of members and passes the resolution.  Chargeability on unit-wise results in higher contribution by small flat owners and lower contribution by larger flat owners. Maintenance charges are the foundation to run the expenses of the society. Now first let us see the provisions in the Act of 1960 and the byelaws. Byelaws are contracts between the management and society. Any breach of byelaws amounts to a breach of contract and breach of trust. Any discrimination made is a serious breach of equal rights granted under the constitution of India. BYE-LAWS PROVISIONS FOR CHARGABILITY OF MAINTENANCE: LEVY OF CHARGES OF THE SOCIETY The contribution to be collected from the Members of the Society, towards outgoing and establishment of its funds, referred to in these bye-laws as ‘the charges’ may be in relation to the following : (i) Property Taxes, (ii) Water Charges, (iii) Common Electricity Charges, (iv) Contribution to Repairs and Maintenance Fund, (v) Expenses on repairs and maintenance of the lifts of the Society, including charges for running the lift. (vi) Contribution to the Sinking Fund, (vii) Service Charges, (Viii) Car Parking Charges, (ix) Interest on the defaulted charges, (x) Repayment of the installment of the loan and interest, (xi) Non-occupancy Charges, (xii) Insurance Charges, (xiii) Lease rent, (xiv) Nonagricultural tax. (xv) Education and Training Fund (xvi) Election Fund (xvii) Any Other Charges. The Service charges of the Society referred to at 64 (vii) above shall include the following: Salaries of the office staff, liftmen, watchmen, malis and any other employees of the Society. Where the Society has independent Office, the property taxes, electricity charges, water charges etc. for the same. Printing, Stationery and Postage, Travelling Allowance and conveyance charges to the staff and the Members of the Committee of the Society. Sitting fees paid to the Members of the Committee of the Society, Subscription to the Education Fund of the Maharashtra Rajya Sahakari Sangh Ltd. Annual Subscription of the Housing Federation and any other co-operative institution to which the Society is affiliated. Entrance fees for affiliation to the Housing Federation and any other cooperative institution. Audit Fees for internal, Statutory and reaudit, if any. Expenses incurred at meetings of the general body, the Committee and the Sub-Committee, if any k. Retainer fees, legal charges, statutory enquiry fees. Common electricity charges. Any other charges approved by the General Body at its Meeting. However such charges should not contradict the provisions of the Act, Rules and Bye-laws of the Society. 66. The Committee shall apportion the Share of each Member towards the charges of the Society on the following basis: Property taxes: As fixed by the Local Authority Water Charges: On the basis of the total number and size of inlets provided in each flat. iii. Expenses on repairs and maintenance of the building/buildings of the Society: At the rate fixed at the general body from time to time, subject to the minimum of 0.75 percent per annum, of the construction cost of each flat for meeting […]

Read more

LAW GOVERNING DIVORCE BY MUTUAL CONSENT AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL  PROVISION

September 22, 2022

MARRIAGES ARE DECIDED IN HEAVEN BUT LIVED ON EARTH Introduction: Couples are so eager to get married but are not ready to accept duties and responsibilities. The problem starts from here. Marriage is the foundation of a healthy society. A fractured family gives a fractured and weak society. It gives an insecure future to the nation. Families spend lakhs and crores on the wedding with branded dresses, pre-wedding shoots, food, and ornaments but don’t focus on the spiritual and social aspects of marriage. So once the film of a wedding is over, couples enter the world of reality and find it difficult to manage their relationship with each other and with other family members. From divorce they give an insecure future to their kid if any, and to themselves. Their family members too. As laws in India are such people avoid staying together in fear of criminal prosecution, which is evidently misused in the majority of cases on advice to get divorce and alimony. As per data compiled by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) in the report Crime in India 2020 about 5% of the cases under Section 498A were found to be false. The outcome is couples prefer to leave the country and settle abroad and seniors land in old age homes. These are serious dangers to society. So, should divorce by Mutual Consent be instant? Should six months cooling period be waived? If Yes,  on what terms? If No, then why? The issue involved: A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court will start hearing on 28th September,  to consider the extent of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, 1950, to dissolve the marriage. The 5-Judge Bench headed by Justice S.K. Kaul and comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, AS Oka, Vikram Nath, and JK Maheshwari was of the opinion that the real issue is the exercise of power under Article 142 when there is an irretrievable breakdown of marriage, but one party is not consenting to divorce. Shilpa Shailesh vs Varun Sreenivasan The Constitution Bench reference originates from a Transfer petition, wherein pursuant to the settlement, the parties had sought appropriate order of the Court to dissolve their marriage, and the same was granted by the Apex Court on the following grounds – there has been an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage between the parties; the parties are consenting to divorce; requiring the parties to go to the jurisdictional family court to invoke the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to seek a decree of divorce would be a lengthy process and that, the Family Courts in the country are already burdened with a huge volume of similar litigation. Dictum: Man is a social animal. He cannot live in isolation. To carry forward the human race a sacred institution is created by the name of marriage to have progeny. Who will continue the family tradition, language, dialect, culture, food habits, etcetera. In Hindus, marriage is a sacred institution and not contractual. It carries the sanctity of an institution namely marriage. What is important is to carry forward the family legacy too. Divorce was an […]

Read more

CAN THE COURT RESTRAIN THE ELECTION COMMISSION TO DISCHARGE ITS CONSTITUTIONAL DUTIES WHEN THE HEARING OF THE MATTER IS NOT OVER? DOES IT AMOUNT TO ENCROACHMENT IN THE TERRITORY OF AN INDEPENDENT CONSTITUTIONAL BODY? MAHARASHTRA SHIV SENA SPLIT AND CONSTITUTIONAL BENCH

August 24, 2022

“Of course, inasmuch as the power of altering every feature of the Constitution remains elsewhere politically, the Constitution is neither the ultimate ‘‘political’’ sovereign nor a legally unalterable and absolute sovereign. All constitutional and ‘‘legal’’ sovereigns are necessarily restrained and limited sovereigns. I thought and still think that such a working theory should be acceptable to lawyers, particularly as the dignitaries of State, including Judges of superior Courts, and all the legislators, who have to take oaths prescribed by the Third Schedule of our Constitution, swear ‘‘allegiance’’ to the Constitution as though the documents itself is a personal Ruler. This accords with our own ancient notions of the law as ‘‘The King of Kings’’ and the majesty of all that it stands for: The Rightfulness of the Ends as well as of the means.” Kesvananda Bharti’s case (AIR 1973 SC 1461) The Supreme Court on Tuesday referred to a Constitution Bench the petitions filed by the rival groups of Shiv Sena in relation to the political development in State of Maharashtra.  This is Breaking News today. Several questions are before Supreme Court which will now constitute five Judges Bench. I will not touch the same. But can Court by its order restrain any constitutional independent body from discharging its function under the constitution for which it is constituted? First, let us see relevant provisions. Part XV of the Constitution provides for elections. Superintendence, direction and control of elections to be vested in an Election Commission.—(1) The superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections to Parliament and to the Legislature of every State and of elections to the offices of President and Vice-President held under this Constitution 1*** shall be vested in a Commission (referred to in this Constitution as the Election Commission). (2) The Election Commission shall consist of the Chief Election Commissioner and such number of other Election Commissioners, if any, as the President may from time to time fix and the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners shall, subject to the provisions of any law made in that behalf by Parliament, be made by the President. (3) When any other Election Commissioner is so appointed the Chief Election Commissioner shall act as the Chairman of the Election Commission. (4) Before each general election to the House of the People and to the Legislative Assembly of each State, and before the first general election and thereafter before each biennial election to the Legislative Council of each State having such Council, the President may also appoint after consultation with the Election Commission such Regional Commissioners as he may consider necessary to assist the Election Commission in the performance of the functions conferred on the Commission by clause (1). (5) Subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament, the conditions of service and tenure of office of the Election Commissioners and the Regional Commissioners shall be such as the President may by rule determine: Provided that the Chief Election Commissioner shall not be removed from his office except in like manner and on the […]

Read more

GYAN VAPI AND TEMPLES APPLICABILITY OF “PLACES OF WORSHIP LAW- 1991” –DISCUSSION

May 22, 2022

       MEANING OF GYAN VAPI: This was derived from the name of an adjoining waterbody — Gyan Vapi (“Well of Knowledge”) — which was a sacred site in itself and, in all likelihood, predated the Vishweshwar temple.   CAUSE FOR THIS DISCUSSION: CONTEMPORARY CIRCUMSTANCES  In the year 1991 parliament passed a law namely an Act to prohibit conversion of any place of worship and to provide for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on the 15th day of August 1947 and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. This Act is currently a topic of hot discussion. The incident which brought this law into the public domain is a suit order by Senior Division Civil Court Varanasi in which one Sohanlal Arya has claimed that Gyan Vapi Mosque is the temple. The said temple structure was partially demolished as per orders of the then Mughal ruler Aurangzeb. By an order Civil court carried out the survey in the meantime Muslim community leaders approached the Supreme Court to seek a stay of the proceedings before the Varanasi court. The Supreme Court has granted a stay and is now hearing the matter. The Supreme Court has also by its order transferred the suit to Varanasi Court District Judge. BRUTAL HISTORY OF INVASION, CONVERSION, AND DESTRUCTION OF TEMPLES IN INDIA : Indian history is full of conflict, invasion, and bloodshed. Hindus had to face atrocities at the hands of invaders.  India was invaded by many foreign forces and two large invaders are the Mughals and Britishers. Aurangzeb was a cruel Mughal dynast, and he ordered for demolishing of temples. They converted Hindus to Islam by force. This painful, harsh, brutal, unkind history of this land cannot be erased, forgotten, and denied. Below is a map of the Mughal Empire: Antecedents and history: General Order of the destruction of Temples: 9th April 1669 One of the main objectives of Aurangzeb’s policy was to demolish Hindu temples. When he ordered (13th October 1666) removal of the carved railing, which Prince Dara Shukoh had presented to Keshava Rai temple at Mathura, he had observed ‘In the religion of the Musalmans it is improper even to look at a temple’, and that it was totally unbecoming of a Muslim to act like Dara Shukoh (Exhibit No. 6, Akhbarat, 13th October 1666). This was followed by destruction of the famous Kalka temple in Delhi (Exhibit No. 6, 7, 8, Akhbarat, 3rd and 12th September 1667). In 1669, shortly after the death of Mirza Raja Jai Singh of Amber, a general order was issued (9th April 1669) for the demolition of temples and established schools of the Hindus throughout the empire and banning public worship (Exhibit Nos. 9 & 10). Soon after this the great temple of Keshava Rai was destroyed (Jan.-Feb. 1670) (Exhibit No. 12) and in its place a lofty mosque was erected. The idols, the author of Maasir-i-Alamgiri informs, were carried to Agra and buried under the steps of the mosque built by Begum Sahiba in order to be continually trodden upon, and the name of […]

Read more

“SECULARISM” IN THE PREAMBLE OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION – A CONTROVERSIAL ZONE

May 7, 2022

The Preamble was used by Supreme Court as an aid to construction in Behram Khurshed Pasikaka v. The State of Bombay [1955] 1 S.C.R. 613 at p. 653. After referring to Part III, Mahajan, C.J., observed: We think that the rights described as fundamental rights are a necessary consequence of the declaration in the preamble that the people of India having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a sovereign democratic republic and to secure to all its citizens’ justice, social, economic, and political; liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith, and worship; equality of status and of opportunity. These fundamental rights have not been put in the Constitution merely for individual benefits, though ultimately, they come into operation in considering individual rights. They have been put there as a matter of public policy and the doctrine of waiver can have no application to provisions of law which have been enacted as a matter of Constitutional policy. Is the Preamble part of our Constitution? This was decided in the matter of Berubari In Re: The Berubari Union And  vs Unknown on 14 March 1960 Equivalent citations: AIR 1960 SC 845, 1960 3 SCR 250 There is no doubt that the declaration made by the people of India in the exercise of their sovereign will in the preamble to the Constitution is, in the words of Story, “a key to open the mind of the makers” which may show the general purposes for which they made the several provisions in the Constitution; but nevertheless the preamble is not a part of the Constitution, and, as Willoughby has observed about the preamble to the American Constitution, “it has never been regarded as the source of any substantive power conferred on the Government of the United States, or on any of its departments. Such powers embrace only those expressly granted in the body of the Constitution and such as may be implied from those so granted”. In S.R.Bommai vs Union of India: It was held in this landmark judgment that : Secularism is one of the basic features of the Constitution. While freedom of religion is guaranteed to all persons in India, from the point of view of the State, the religion, faith, or belief of a person is immaterial. To the State, all are equal and are entitled to be treated equally. In matters of State, religion has no place. No political party can simultaneously be a religious party. Politics and religion cannot be mixed. Any State Government which pursues unsecular policies or unsecular course of action acts contrary to the constitutional mandate and renders itself amenable to action under Article 356. Note: This feature of secularism was rejected by the Constituent Assembly ( Drafting of Constitution Committee) on 6th December 1948. Bommai ( Supra)  is said to be a landmark judgment of the Supreme Court on Article 356, it is true that Secularism is guaranteed as a fundamental right, but the word “Secularism” was never there in the Preamble of the Constitution of India 1949 and the insertion thereof was refused and negatived by the Constituent Assembly. Below is the link to the […]

Read more

MAKING AND REPEAL OF LAWS A FAILED STRATEGY OR STRATEGY TO FAIL CONSTITUTION?

November 19, 2021

Today Prime Minister of India Shri Narendra Modi in an address to the Nation has withdrawn three Farm Laws which were made after following due process of law as envisaged in Constitution of India. BRIEF HISTORY OF LAWS THAT WERE EITHER ABANDONED /WITHDRAWN OR STAYED BY A COURT OF LAW IN THE LAST SEVEN YEARS. THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 (also Land Acquisition Act, 2013) passed by the Indian Parliament that regulates the land acquisition and lays down the procedure and rules for granting compensation, rehabilitation, and resettlement to the affected persons in India. The Act has provisions to provide fair compensation to those whose land is taken away, brings transparency to the process of acquisition of land to set up factories or buildings, infrastructural projects, and assures rehabilitation of those affected. The Act establishes regulations for land acquisition as a part of India’s massive industrialization drive driven by a public-private partnership. The Act replaced the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, a nearly 120-year-old law enacted during British rule. HOW PASSED? The Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2011 was introduced in Lok Sabha on 7 September 2011. The bill was then passed by Loksabha on 29 August 2013 and by Rajya Sabha on 4 September 2013. The bill then received the assent of the President of India, Pranab Mukherjee on 27 September 2013. The Act came into force on 1 January 2014. In May 2014, the present Narendra Modi NDA government promulgated an Ordinance to amend the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (RFCTLARR) Act, 2013, which was enacted during the previous  UPA regime referred to hereinabove under the caption titled which came into effect from January 1, 2014. The new law replaced /repealed the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which had been in force for over a century. On December 31, 2014, exactly one year after the new law had come into effect, the present NDA government sought to amend it by promulgating the RFCTLARR (Amendment) Ordinance, 2014. An amendment bill was introduced in Parliament to endorse and validate the Ordinance. Lok Sabha passed the bill but the same couldn’t be passed in Rajya Sabha as the present NDA government had no majority numbers to pass the said Bill. On 30 May 2015, the President of India promulgated the amendment ordinance for the third time   HOW WAS IT EVENTUALLY WITHDRAWN? Considering continuing anger against the amendment, Prime Minister Modi announced the decision to withdraw the Ordinance in his Mann Ki Baat program broadcast on August 31, 2015, and the said Ordinance has lapsed. (Courtesy India Times) CCA- NRC THE CITIZENSHIP (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2019 The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 was passed by the Parliament of India on 11 December 2019. It amended the Citizenship Act, 1955 by providing a gateway to Indian citizenship for persecuted religious minorities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan who are Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, or Christians, and arrived in India before the end of December 2014. The law does not grant such eligibility to Muslims from these Muslim-majority countries. […]

Read more

EMERGENCY ARBITRATION, WHETHER VALID IN INDIA UNDER ARBITRATION ACT,1996?

September 9, 2021

This interesting issue came up before Delhi High Court in Amazon.Com Nv Investment vs Future Coupons Private Limited & ors passed on 18 March, 2021 Three important questions arose for consideration before Delhi High Court :- What is the legal status of an Emergency Arbitrator i.e. whether the Emergency Arbitrator is an arbitrator and whether the interim order of the Emergency Arbitrator is an order under Section 17 (1) and is enforceable under 17(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act? Observed: Section 2(8) of the Indian Arbitration Act 1996 expressly provides that where Part I of the Indian Arbitration Act 1996 refers to an ―agreement of the parties‖, such agreement shall include the arbitration rules referred to in the parties’ agreement. In this way, the Indian Arbitration Act 1996 provides that any arbitration rules agreed to by the parties are incorporated into the arbitration agreement. Unless expressly excluded, it is trite that the parties cannot resile from the terms of their arbitration agreement, including their agreement to allow either party to request the appointment of an emergency arbitrator. Further, Section 17 of the Indian Arbitration Act 1996, which empowers an arbitral tribunal to grant interim reliefs, does not preclude or intimate that parties cannot agree to institutional rules which allow recourse to emergency arbitration. In the absence of a mandatory prohibition contained in the Indian Arbitration Act 1996 or public policy constraints, the parties may agree to any arbitral procedure. Whether the Emergency Arbitrator misapplied the Group of Companies doctrine which applies only to proceedings under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act? Held The Indian Arbitration Act 1996, does not preclude parties from agreeing to arbitrate under institutional rules that allow either party to request appropriate reliefs from an emergency arbitrator. The Respondents’ references to the 246th Law Commission Report do not assist its submissions on this issue in a meaningful way. It is just as plausible that Parliament, in its wisdom, did not consider it necessary to amend the Indian Arbitration Act 1996 to make a specific reference to emergency arbitrators because it was legally unnecessary – that is to say, it might have been an instance of the Law Commission making a suggestion to gild the lily. There was no need for statutory recognition if the courts and case law did not find this a problematic issue. Indeed, given the prevalence, even then, in the employment and use of this useful procedure internationally, this is likely to have been the case. It is also noteworthy that the power to appoint an emergency arbitrator is currently recognized in a number of domestic Indian arbitration institution rules, including (a) the Delhi International Arbitration Centre of the Delhi High Court; (b) the Mumbai Centre for International Arbitration; and (c) the Madras High Court Arbitration Centre, all of which include, under their rules, provisions for emergency arbitration and set out the appointment process, applicable procedures, and timing as well as the powers of an emergency arbitrator. Emergency Arbitrators are recognised under the Indian Arbitration Framework The Claimant rightly asserts that the Respondents’ insistence that the notion of emergency arbitration is […]

Read more

WHY CENTRAL GOVERNMENT RELUCTANT TO IMPOSE PRESIDENT RULE IN WEST BENGAL?

May 5, 2021

Let us see various provisions of the Indian Constitution. Article 352 in The Constitution of India Proclamation of Emergency (1) If the President is satisfied that a grave emergency exists whereby the security of India or of any part of the territory thereof is threatened, whether by war or external aggression or armed rebellion, he may, by Proclamation, made a declaration to that effect in respect of the whole of India or of such part of the territory thereof as may be specified in the Proclamation Explanation A Proclamation of Emergency declaring that the security of India or any part of the territory thereof is threatened by war or by external aggression or by armed rebellion may be made before the actual occurrence of war or of any such aggression or rebellion, if the President is satisfied that there is imminent danger thereof  Note: This power was exercised in the year 1977 Article 355 casts duty on the state to provide safety and security. Duty of the Union to protect States against external aggression and internal disturbance It shall be the duty of the Union to protect every State against external aggression and internal disturbance and to ensure that the government of every State is carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution. 44th Amendment: The Forty-fourth Constitutional Amendment substituted “armed rebellion” for “internal disturbance” in Article 352. “Internal disturbance” is, therefore, no longer a ground for taking action under that Article. Further, it cannot, by itself, be a ground for imposing President’s rule under Article 356(1), if it is not intertwined with a situation where the government of a State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. What is Internal Disorder: ( Source Sarkaria Commission Report) 6.3.04 It is difficult to define precisely the concept of ‘internal disturbance’. Similar provisions, however, occur in the Constitutions of other countries. Article 16 of the Federal Constitution of Switzerland uses the expression “internal disorder”. The Constitutions of the United States of America and Australia use the expression ‘domestic violence’. The framers of the Indian Constitution have, in place of this term, used the expression ‘internal disturbance’. Obviously, they have done so as they intended to cover not only domestic violence, but something more. The scope of the term ‘internal disturbance’ is wider than ‘domestic violence’. It conveys the sense of ‘domestic chaos’, which takes the colour of a security threat from its associate expression, ‘external aggression’. Such a chaos could be due to various causes. Large-scale public disorder which throws out of gear the even tempo of administration and endangers the security of the State, is ordinarily, one such cause. Such an internal disturbance is normally man-made. But it can be Nature-made, also. Natural calamities of unprecedented magnitude, such as flood, cyclone, earth-quake, epidemic, etc. may paralyse the government of the State and put its security in jeopardy. Instances: Gujarat.—(9-2-1974) The anti-price-rise agitation in Gujarat turned into a mass movement with demands for removal of the Ministry and dissolution of the Assembly. Army had to be called in at some places to deal with violence. […]

Read more

THE FOURTH ESTATE : THE POLICE (INCITEMENT TO DISAFFECTION) ACT, 1922 PARALLEL INVESTIGATION AND THE VIEWS OF COURTS

October 28, 2020

The term Fourth Estate or fourth power refers to the press and news media both in explicit capacity of advocacy and implicit ability to frame political issues. Though it is not formally recognized as a part of a political system, it wields significant indirect social influence. Article 19(1) (a) grants every citizen Freedom of Speech and Expression. We hear in News Channel debate that in Mumbai police is using British Era Act. That is The Police (Incitement to Dissatisfaction) Act,1922 ( the said 1922 Act) It was a news for any lawyer. Justice M.C.Chagla had said, there are so many laws in India , that we also come to know when it is argued by an Advocate before us. This was relating to Rationing Law. Under the circumstances its necessary to read and understand the views of the Courts after Independence.  Its relevant for us to study and understand the law and its effectiveness. 1. Short title, extent and commencement.— (1) This Act may be called the Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act, 1922.  [(2) It extends to the whole of India, except [the territories which immediately before 1st November, 1956, were comprised in Part B States].] (3) It shall come into force in any State or part of a State on such date as the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, direct. State amendments Andhra Pradesh.—In sub-section (2) of section 1, after the expression ‘except the territories which immediately before the 1st November, 1956 were comprised in Part B States’ add ‘other than the territories specified in sub-section (1) of section 3 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956’. [Vide Andhra Pradesh Act 23 of 1958, sec. 3 and Sch. (1-2-1960)] Madhya Pradesh.—In section 1— (i) in sub-section (2), after ‘Part B States’, add ‘other than the Madhya Bharat and Sironja regions of the State of Madhya Pradesh’; (ii) for sub-section (3), substitute the following:— “(3) It shall be in force in all such areas in Madhya Pradesh in which it was in force immediately before the commencement of Madhya Pradesh Second Extension of Laws Act, 1961 (40 of 1961), and shall come into force in other areas, on such date as the State Government may, by notification, appoint”. [Vide Madhya Pradesh Act 40 of 1961 First Schedule, Part A, Item 5.] Maharashtra, Gujarat.—In its application to the State of Maharashtra in section 1.— (i) To sub-section (2), add the following proviso:— “Provided that on the commencement of the Police (Incitement to Disaffection) (Bombay Extension and Amendment) Act, 1958, it shall extend to the Saurashtra and Hyderabad areas of the State of Bombay”. (ii) To sub-section (3), add the following proviso:— “Provided that on the commencement of the Police (Incitement to Disaffection) (Bombay Extension and Amendment) Act, 1958, it shall come into force in that part of the Saurashtra area of the State of Bombay in which the Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act, 1922, as modified and applied to that area by the State of Saurashtra (Application of Central and Bombay Acts) Ordinance, 1948, was in force immediately before such commencement.” [Vide Bombay Act 77 of 1958, sec. 3 (7-10-1958): Act 11 of 1960, sec. 87 (1-5-1960)] (Meghalaya) —In […]

Read more