PROVINCE OF BOMBAY Vs. KHUSHALDAS S ADVANI SINCE DECEASED AND AFTER HIM HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE A GOVINDRAM KHUSHALDAS AND B RAMCHAND KHUSHALDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from a judgment of the High court at Bombay and it relates to the power of the High court to issue a writ of certiorari against the province of Bombay to quash an order to requisition certain premises. The material facts, as stated in the judgment of the High court, are these. One Abdul Hamid Ismail was, prior to the 29th of January, 1948, the tenant of the first floor of a building known as' Paradise' at Warden Road, Bombay, the landlord of which was one Dr. M. D. Vakil. On the 29/01/1948, Ismail assigned his tenancy to the petitioner and two others, the son and brother's daughter's son of the petitioner (the respondent). All the three assignees were refugees from Sind. On the 4/02/1948, the petitioner went into possession of the flat. On the 26/02/1948, the government of Bombay issued an order requisitioning the flat under section 3 of the Bombay Land Requisition Ordinance (V of 1947) which came into force on the 4/12/1947 On the same day Dr. Vakil was informed that the government had allotted the premises to Mrs. C. Dayaram who was also a refugee from Sind. Further orders were issued authorising an Inspector to take possession of the premises. On the 4/03/1948, the petitioner filed a petition for a writ of certiorari and n order under section 45 of the Specific Relief Act. The petition was heard by Mr. Justice Bhagwati who, inter alia, granted the writ against the province of Bombay and the secretary etc. On appeal the appellate court confirmed the order as regards the issue of the writ of certiorari against the appellant, but cancelled the order as regards the other parties. The appellant has come on appeal to this court.

(2.) The learned Attorney-General, on behalf of the appellant, urged the following three points for the court's consideration:

(3.) S. 3, 4, 10 and 12 of the Ordinance which are material for the discussion in this appeal run as follows: