Chagla, C.J.

[1] The petitioners who are the appellants before us challenge an order of requisition made by the State of Bombay on 24-3-1951.

[2] The order was made under Section 6, Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948, and it contained a declaration that the premises had become vacant on or after the month of May 1950. The order did not state on the face of it the purpose for which the premises were requisitioned. A supplemental order was made by the State on 22-8-1951:, and that order stated that the premises were requisitioned for a public purpose, and the public purpose was; "housing a person without accommodation."

[3] Act XL of 1951 was enacted in November 1951 and that Act validated orders passed previously, if in fact the premises were requisitioned ton a public purpose; and in this case Government, relying on the Amending Act, sought to establish in the Court below that in fact the premises were requisitioned for a public purpose; and the question that arises for our determination is whether those promises were in fact requisitioned for a public purpose. The learned Judge below has taken the view that the premises were requisitioned for a public purpose and has, therefor