S VASUDEVAN Vs. S D MITAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE four Petitions have been placed before us for hearing on being referred to by Mr. Justice K. K. Desai. These four petitions gives rise to some common questions of law and can conveniently be disposed of by a common judgment. In the first two petitions, M. P. Nos. 248 and 254 of 1960, constitutionality of the Essential Services Maintenance Ordinance, 1960, No. 1 of 1960, promulgated by the President has been challenged, while in the other two petitions, M. P. Nos. 255 and 256 of 1960, constitutionality of Rule 4 (A) and rule 4 (B) of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1955, has been challenged. The questions raised are of considerable importance.

(2.) FACTS giving rise to these petitions may be briefly stated. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of Article 123 of the Constitution, the President of India promulgated as Ordinance called 'Essential Services Maintenance Ordinance, 1960', hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance. It is in the following terms: -

(3.) ANY person who commences a strike which is illegal under this Ordinance or goes or remains on, or otherwise takes part in any such strike shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees, or with both.