CHINTAMAN RAO AND RAM KRISHNA versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

CHINTAMAN RAO AND RAM KRISHNA versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

The Central Provinces and Berar Regulation of Manufacture of Bidis (Agricultural Purposes) Act, LXIV of 1948, does not impose reasonable restrictions within the meaning of Article 19(6) of the Constitution because its provisions are arbitrary, excessive, and unreasonably prohibit the manufacture of bidis beyond what is necessary for the supply of agricultural labour; therefore, it is void.

Parties
Petitioner: Chintaman Rao; Petitioner: Ram Krishna; Respondent: State of Madhya Pradesh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 November 1950
Procedural Posture
Application Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Mandamus / Final Judgment
Outcome
Petitions allowed; statute and orders declared void.
Legal Topics
Fundamental Rights, Reasonable Restrictions, Freedom of Occupation, Judicial Review
Constitutional Law Labour Law Administrative Law Fundamental Rights Reasonable Restrictions Freedom of Occupation Judicial Review

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chintaman Rao

Petitioner

Ram Krishna

Petitioner

State of Madhya Pradesh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Mandamus / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Central Provinces and Berar Regulation of Manufacture of Bidis (Agricultural Purposes) Act, LXIV of 1948, imposes reasonable restrictions on the fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g)
  2. 2 Whether the statute is void for being inconsistent with Part III of the Constitution

Ratio Decidendi

The Central Provinces and Berar Regulation of Manufacture of Bidis (Agricultural Purposes) Act, LXIV of 1948, does not impose reasonable restrictions within the meaning of Article 19(6) of the Constitution because its provisions are arbitrary, excessive, and unreasonably prohibit the manufacture of bidis beyond what is necessary for the supply of agricultural labour; therefore, it is void.

Court Disposition

Petitions allowed; statute and orders declared void.

Orders

  • Respondents directed not to enforce section 4 of the Act against petitioners.
  • Orders issued by Deputy Commissioner on 13 June 1950 and 29 September 1950 declared void, inoperative, and ineffective.