SATYANARAYANA RAO, J.

These two petitions raise the question of the validity of the Madras Electricity Supply Undertakings (Acquisition) Act, 1949 (Act XLIII of 1949) (hereinafter called the impugned Act) and they were therefore heard together. In C.M.P. No. 975 of 1951 the petitioner is the Narasaraopeta Electric Corporation, Ltd., by its managing director V. V. Sastry, and the company was incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. The petitioner in C.M.P. No. 4697 of 1951 is the Rajahmundry Electric Supply Corporation, Ltd., its Vice-Chairman, Appana Rangarao, and this company was also incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. The petitioners in both the petitions obtained licences for the supply of electricity under the provisions of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910. The memorandum of association of the two companies authorised each company not only to carry on the business of electricity supply but also several other objects enabling the company to carry on trade or business of various kinds. In G.O. No. Misc. 3496, dated 18th September, 1950, the Government issued a notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act declaring that the undertaking of the Narasaraopeta