JAGDISH NARAIN BABULAL JAISWAL Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MY opinion in this case shall also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 144, 145 and 154 of 1960. All these petitions raise a common question of law, were heard together and can be disposed of by a common order. They are all directed against the orders of the Collector, Damoh, requisitioning the godowns of the petitioners for what he alleged was 'a public Purpose', viz. , for storage of Government foodgrains. The orders have been passed in exercise of the powers conferred on all the Collectors under Section 3 of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation (Requisition) Act (No. LXIII of 1948) (hereinafter called the Act), read with Section 14 thereof by the State Government vide Home (General) Department Notification No. 2866/ii-A (3), dated the 3rd July, 1959. The petitions seek to get the said orders quashed by a writ of certiorari or by any other appropriate writ, order or direction, inter alia, on the following grounds, which are being considered first as they are common to all the cases:

(2.) SECTION 14 of the Act, however, Permits the State Government to delegate its powers under the Act to any officer or authority subordinate to it. It reads as follows: "the State Government may by order direct that any power conferred under this Act, shall in such circumstances and under such conditions, if any, as may be specified in that direction, be exercised by any officer or authority subordinate to it. "

(3.) THE legislature which conferred on the State Government the power to requisition, in its wisdom, also chose to confer on it a power of delegation, so that the power so conferred by it on the State Government may be exercised by the State Government itself or by any officer or authority subordinate to it as its delegate. The delegation made by the State Government in favour of the Collectors in exercise of the aforesaid power has the widest amplitude and permits a complete substitution of the delegate of the State Government in place of 'the State Government' in Section 3 of the Act. Whether it was wise or proper for the legislature to do so or whether it was a right policy for the State Government to have conferred such wide powers on the Collectors without specifying any circumstances or conditions under which the powers may be exercised by them may be, relevant in the context of Article 19 (1) (f) of the Constitution, if that article applies, but cannot invalidate the exercise of the power by the delegate.