Chagla, C.J.

1. A petn. was presented before Tendolkar J. by one Heman Santlal Alreja alleging that he was a sub-tenant of certain premises that Govt. on 29-5-1950, had issued an order under Section 6 (4) (a), Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948, requisitioning the premises of which he was a sub-tenant, that the order passed by Govt. was void because according to him Section 6 (4) (a) of the Act was void as contravening the provisions of the Constitution. As the question raised was of considerable importance as several other petns. were pending before Tondolkar J. which raised the same question, Tendolker J. refd. the matter to a D. B. in doing so the learned Judge raised several questions for our decision. As we shall presently point out, we propose to decide only those questions which directly arise from the facts of this particular petn. It is always inadvisable to travel outside the facts of a particular case express hypothetical opinions which may only embarrass Judges who may have to consider cases in future which arise on different facts. This is particularly so when we are dealing with our Constitution which is a new enactment which always raises questions