Chagla, C.J. :- This appeal arises out of a petition challenging an order of requisition made under S. 6 (4) (a), Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948, requisitioning the premises of the petitioner who occupied them as a sub-tenant. When this petition first came up before Tendolkar, J., he held that Act 33 of 1948 was void. The State of Bombay came in appeal and we held (Heman Santlal Alreja v. State of Bombay, 53 Bom LR 355), that that Act was not void and remanded the petition to the learned Judge for disposal on merits. The learned Judge considered various preliminary points that were raised with regard to the validity of legislation dealing with requisition. He came to the conclusion that Act 33 of 1948 amended by the Bombay Land Requisition (Amendment) Act, 1950, (Act 2 of 1950) and further amended by the Bombay Land Requisition (Second Amendment) Act, 1950, (Act 39 of 1950) was void on various grounds and he also held that the order of requisition dated 29-5-1950, was bad inasmuch as it did not state the public purpose for which the premises had been requisitioned. He, therefore, issued a writ of mandamus against the State of Bombay restraining it from enforcing or taki