There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner was found to be guilty of contravention of any of the provisions of the Act on any other occasion after March, 1952. " In that case the combined operation of s. It is further submitted that the principal function is that of a duplicating machine and cannot be treated as a offset printing machine. In this state of record we must hold that the respondents failed to prove that the petitioner was guilty of repeated failure to comply with the provisions of the Act.

10, 12 or 14 of the Act. But in the particulars furnished, the State Government alleged that the petitioner had been guilty of repeated failure to comply with the provisions of the Act, but the particulars did not support that statement, for, apart from the default of March, 1952, the alleged contravention of rules were discovered by the Inspector of Mica Accounts only during the inspection of some of the godowns between December 3, 1953, and December 11, 1953.

That prosecution cannot be pressed into 627 service, as the State Government renewed the licence for 1953-54. We need not however pursue the matter further on this occasion. That apart, the State Government did not find on the material that the petitioner was guilty of repeated failure to comply with any of the provisions of the Act. 31 would be more appropriate to the suit claim. 30 governed the suit claim and proceed to consider the question on that basis. Unless there is repeated failure within the meaning of that clause the State Government has no power to cancel the licence under the said clause.

3 Of the Act, under which the order must now be deemed to have been issued. The result of that one continuous inspection cannot be the basis for holding that the petitioner was guilty of " repeated failure " within the meaning of s. On the basis of the said finding, the respondents would have no power to take action under S. The learned Counsel for the appellant argued that art. The ink which is carried in the drum pieces through the micro-pores in the master on the paper when it is fed underneath the rotating drum.

19(1)(f) and (g) of the Constitution. That apart, neither in the notice initiating the proceedings nor in the notification cancelling the licence issued by the Government it was stated that the petitioner was guilty of " repeated failure " within the meaning of the said clause. The particulars furnished by the Government did not disclose any such repeated failure. The Union of India appealed. It is, therefore, submitted that Risograph is nothing but a transformation of the duplicator with certain additional functions.

25(1)(c) of the Act, repeated failure to comply with any of the provisions of the Act is a necessary condition for the cancellation of a licence. We shall assume that art. 30 would apply to the suit claim, whereas the 88 learned Counsel for the respondent contended that art. Apart from the only prosecution, which we have already noticed, the petitioner was not prosecuted for any other contravention of the provisions of ss. 112 of Act XLII of 1950 and the provision's of Regulation 1of 1888 was that the Court of Wards could in its own discretion and on its own subjective determination assume superintendence of the property of a landlord who habitually infringed the rights of his tenants.

The High Court held that the cl. If the Undertaking at that stage has the power to carry it out piecemeal, it would be possible for it to abuse the power of implementation and to discriminate against some operators and in favour of others included in the scheme and also to break up the integrity of the scheme and in a sense modify it against the terms of s. " When a law deprives a person of possession of his property for an indefinite period of time merely on the subjective determination of an executive officer, such a law can, on no construction of the word "reasonable" be described as coming within that expression, because it completely negatives the fundamental right by making its enjoyment depend on the mere pleasure and discretion of the executive, the citizen affected having no right to have recourse for establishing the contrary in a civil court.

It was also urged that the said clause was ultra vires the powers conferred on the Central Government by S. 19(1)(f) and (g) of the Constitution. There is no difficulty for the Undertaking to apply for permits relating to the entire scheme at the same time, for the manner in which the scheme is prepared under s. The afore-mentioned process clearly indicates that there are no principles of offset printing or photocopying involved. 68C takes into account all the difficulties which might arise in the implementation of the scheme and with that very object provides for taking over particular types of transport services in relation to areas or routes or even portions thereof.

The Act also did not provide any machinery for determining the question whether a certain landlord was a person who habitually infringed the rights of his tenants.