You are on page 1of 1

REASONING:

Application was submitted under article 32 of the constitution of India for a writ of
Mandamus. The point of consideration in these applications was whether the Central
Provisions and Berar Act LXIV of 1948 come within the domain of this saving clause or does
it exceeds its provision. So, to judge the validity of this argument it is necessary to examine
the challenged act and its related provisions.

According to preamble, it is said that it is enacted to provide measures for supply of labour
for bidi manufacturing areas which deputy commissioner prohibited and the contravention of
which is punishable either with six months of imprisonment or fine or both.

CONCLUSION:

So, it is to be concluded that in matter of fundamental right, the Supreme Court has the
supreme power to guard the rights mentioned in the constitution. Thus, it has the power to set
aside the acts of legislature if it violates the freedom guaranteed under constitution. Thus, the
disputed statute does not stand the test of fairness and therefore void.

You might also like