TMI Blog1958 (12) TMI 32X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tes, the State of Rajasthan stands substituted for the former State. It was filed against the decision of the Judicial Commissioner of Ajmer, who certified the case as fit for appeal to this Court under Art. 132 of the Constitution. The Ajmer Legislative Assembly enacted the Ajmer (Sound Amplifiers Control) Act, 1952 (Ajmer 3 of 1953), (hereinafter called the Act) which received the assent of the President on March 9, 1953. This Act was successfully impugned by the respondents before the learned Judicial Commissioner, who held that it was in excess of the powers conferred on the State Legislature under s. 21 of the Government of Part C States Act, 1951 (49 of 1951) and, therefore, ultra vires the State Legislature. The respondents (who were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hereof. Under these provisions, the legislative competence of the State Legislature was confined to the two Lists other than the Union List. If, therefore, the subjectmatter of the Act falls substantially within an Entry in the Union List, the Act must be declared to be unconstitutional, but it is otherwise, if it falls substantially within the other two lists, since prima facie there is no question of repugnancy to a central statute or of an occupied field . The rival Entries considered by the Judicial Commissioner read as follows: Entry No. 31 of Post and Telegraphs; Telephones, wire- the Union List. less,broadcasting and other like forms of communication. Entry No. 6 of Public health and sanitation; hospital the State List. l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hstanding. This was laid down by Gwyer, C. J., in Subramanyam Chettiar v. Muthuswamy Goundan ([1940] F.C.R. 188, 201.), in the following words: It must inevitably happen from time to time that legislation, though purporting to deal with a subject in one list, touches also on a subject in another list, and the different provisions of the enactment may be so closely intertwined that blind adherence to a strictly verbal interpretation would result in a large number of statutes being declared invalid because the legislature enacting them may appear to have legislated in a forbidden sphere. Hence the rule which has been evolved by the Judicial Committee whereby the impugned statute is examined to ascertain its 'pith and substance', ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of an inspector, but it excludes the use in a place other than a public place, of a sound amplifier which is a component part of a wireless apparatus duly licensed under any law for the time being in force. In the explanation which is added, 'public place' is defined as a place (including a road, street or way, whether a thoroughfare or not or a landing place) to which the public are granted access or have a right to resort or over which they have a right to pass. The gist of the prohibition is the use' of an external sound amplifier not a component part of a wireless apparatus, whether in a public place or otherwise, without the sanction in writing of the designated authority and in disregard of the conditions imposed on the u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ause other loud noises, the result of some other instruments, etc., are not equally controlled and prohibited. The pith and substance of the impugned Act is the control of the use of amplifiers in the interests of health and also tranquillity, and thus falls substantially (if not wholly) within the powers conferred to preserve, regulate and promote them and does not so fall within the Entry in the Union List, even though the amplifier, the use of which is regulated and controlled is an apparatus for broadcasting or communication. As Latham, C. J., pointed out in Bank of New South Wales v. The Commonwealth ((1948) 76 C.L.R. 1, 186.): A power to make laws 'with respect to' a subjectmatter is a power to make laws which in reali ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
