https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303585 Inclusion of the Madras Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961 in the Ninth Schedule under Article 31B retrospectively protected it from Part III invalidity, so any earlier defect based on fundamental rights objections stood cured and re-enactment by the State was unnecessary. The ceiling law was also held to fall within the State Legislature's competence, because Entry 18 of List II was read broadly to cover rights in and over land and land tenures, while acquisition of surplus land was supported by Entry 42 of List III. The constitutional challenges therefore failed. en-us Mon, 11 Oct 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Jul 2022 17:24:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303585 Inclusion of the Madras Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961 in the Ninth Schedule under Article 31B retrospectively protected it from Part III invalidity, so any earlier defect based on fundamental rights objections stood cured and re-enactment by the State was unnecessary. The ceiling law was also held to fall within the State Legislature's competence, because Entry 18 of List II was read broadly to cover rights in and over land and land tenures, while acquisition of surplus land was supported by Entry 42 of List III. The constitutional challenges therefore failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 11 Oct 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303585