DILIP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner challenges the continued operation of Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance, 1949 promulgated by His Highness the Raj Pramukh on 14th Dec. , 1949 inter alia on the ground that ordinance having not been subsequently enacted as a legislative Act before expiry of 6 months period, it automatically lapsed in terms of Article 123/213 of the Constitution of India and Section 88 of the Government of India Act, 1935.

(2.) THIS contention is not well founded as the contention is based on an assumption that Raj Pramukh, before the commencement of Constitution was exercising legislative power in terms of Section 88 of the Government of India Act 1935 only during the absence of session of Legislative Assembly and it was required to be placed before House when legislative assembly was convened.

(3.) IT will be profitable to notice the relevant part of Article 10 which reads as under:- " (1) There shall be formed, as soon as practicable, a Constituent Assembly in such manner as the Raj Pramukh may, in consultation with the Government of India in the States Ministry prescribe. (2) IT shall be the duty of the said assembly to frame a Constitution for the United State within the frame work of this Covenant and the Constitution of India, and providing for a Government responsible to the legislature. (3) Until a Constitution so framed comes into operation after receiving the assent of the Raj Pramukh, the legislative authority of the United State shall vest in the Raj Pramukh who may make and promulgate Ordinances for the peace and good Government of the State or any part thereof, and any Ordinance so made shall have the like force of the law as an Act passed by the legislature of the United State.