Judgement

S. R. DAS CJI.- This is an appeal by the State of Bombay from the judgment and order passed on 12th January 1955 by the court of Appeal of the High Court of Judicature of Bombay confirming, though on somewhat different grounds, the judgment and order passed on 22nd April 1954, by a single judge of the said High Court allowing with costs the present respondents petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. The said petition was presented before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay on 18 December 1952.

In the said petition there ware two petitioners who are now the two respondents to this appeal. The first petitioner is an individual who claims to be a citizen of India and the founder and Managing Director of the second petitioner, which is a company incorporated in the State of Mysore and having its registered head office at 2, Residency Road, Bangalore in that State. That petition was further supported by an affidavit sworn by the first petitioner on the same day.

2. The allegations appearing in the said petition and affidavit may now be shortly stated. In July, 1946, the first petitioner applied for and obtained from the then Collector of Bombay a licence, being Licence No. 84 of 1946, for the period ending 31st March 1947, to conduct what was Known as the Littlewood s Football Pool Competitions in India. That licence was granted to the first petitioner under the Provisions of the Bombay Prize Competitions Tax Act, (Bom. XI of 1939) (hereinafter referred to as the 1939 Act), which was then in force.

The said licence was renewed for a period of one year from 1st April 1947 to 31st March 1948. During that period the first petitioner paid, by way of competition tax, to the Bombay Provincial Government a sum of rupees one lakh per annum. the government of Bombay having declined to renew the first petitioner s licence for a further period, the first petitioner filed a petition under S. 45, Specific Relief Act, in the High Court of Bombay, which was eventually, after various proceedings, dismissed by the Court of Appeal on or about 28th March 1949.

3. In the meantime, in view of the delay and difficulty in obtaining a renewal of the licence in Bombay, the first petitioner on or about August 1948, shifted his activities Bombay to the State of Mysore, where he promoted and on 26th February 1949, got incorporated a company under the name R.M D.C. (Mysore) Limited, which was the second petitioner in the High Court and is the second respondent before us.

The first petitioner, who was the promoter of the second petitioner, became the Managing Director of the second petitioner. All the shareholders and directors of the second petitioner are said to be nationals and citizens of India. The second petitioner also owns and runs a weekly newspaper called Sporting Star , which was and is still printed and published at Bangalore in a Press also owned by the second petitioner.

It through this newspaper that the second petitioner conducts and runs a Prize Competition called the R.M.D.C. Crosswords, for which entries are received from various parts of India including the State of Bombay through agents and depots established in those places to collect entry forms and for being forwarded to the head office at Bangalore.

4. The 1939 Act was replaced by the Bombay Lotteries and Prize competition Control and Tax Act (Bom. LIV of 1948), (hereinafter referred to as the 1948 Act) which came into force on 1st December 1948. The 1939 Act as well as the 1948 Act, as originally enacted, did not apply to prize competitions contained in a newspaper printed and published out. side the Province of Bombay. So the Prize Competitions called the R.M.D.C. Crosswords was not affected by either of those two Acts.

5. On 21st June 1951, the State of Mysore, however, enacted the Mysore Lotteries and Prize Competition Control and Tax Act, 1951, which was based upon the lines of the said 1946 Act.

That Mysore Act having come into force on 1st February 1952, the se