Judgement

CHANDRASEKHARA AIYAR, J. : Was the Government of Bombay entitled under cl.(a) of sub-s. (4) of S. 6 Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948 (Act 23 of 1948) to requisition, as for a public purpose, certain premises for "housing a member of the staff of a foreign Consulate?", is the question we have to consider in this appeal, which has arisen out of a writ petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution by the respondent in the Bombay High Court to restrain the State of Bombay from taking such action.

2. On the hearing of the petition before Tendolkar, J. the State succeeded on the ground that the purpose for which the requisition was made was a "public purpose" within the meaning of the Act. But, on appeal, it was held that though the requisition was for a public purpose, the requisition order was invalid, as the public purpose must be either a purpose of the Union, or a purpose of the State and in this particular case the accommodation being required for housing a member of a foreign Consular staff was a Union purpose, which was outside the scope of the powers of the State.

3. Clause (a) of sub-s, (4) of S. 6, omitting portions unnecessary for our present purposes, runs in the