Deo, J—27-1-1953- The appellant challenges the validity of the provisions of the Berar Land Revenue Code conferring rights of pre-emption. According to the learned Counsel, these provisions are void in view of Art. 19 read with Art. 13 of the Constitution. Rule 9(2) (a), Chap. 1, Part I of the Rules of this Court requires a Judge sitting alone to refer any proceeding, other than the original proceeding in eluding a suit pending before him, to the Chief Justice with a recommendation that it be placed before a Bench of two Judges, when it involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Government of India Act or of any Order in Council made thereunder. No doubt, this rule does not refer to a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution as the necessary adaptations were not made in these rules. However, I am of the opinion that the rule contemplates hearing of a proceeding by a Bench of two Judges when it involves substantial questions of law regarding the interpretation of the Constitution. The decision of the question raised by the appellant is of general importance and may affect the law of pre-emption in force in Berar. It