https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290417 A State enactment was treated as validly passed despite an omission in the published proceedings, because the Speaker's certificate and legislative history showed approval and the defect was only procedural. The Court held that President's assent after gubernatorial reservation made the law effective, no second reservation or assent was required, and challenges based on absence of public purpose, inadequate compensation, fraud on the Constitution, and excessive delegation failed. It further held that any protection issue concerning malguzari villages or merger-covenant properties was answered by Articles 31-B, 362 and 363, and the Act was upheld against all constitutional challenges. en-us Fri, 02 May 1952 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Sep 2020 10:26:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290417 A State enactment was treated as validly passed despite an omission in the published proceedings, because the Speaker's certificate and legislative history showed approval and the defect was only procedural. The Court held that President's assent after gubernatorial reservation made the law effective, no second reservation or assent was required, and challenges based on absence of public purpose, inadequate compensation, fraud on the Constitution, and excessive delegation failed. It further held that any protection issue concerning malguzari villages or merger-covenant properties was answered by Articles 31-B, 362 and 363, and the Act was upheld against all constitutional challenges. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 02 May 1952 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290417