S.R. DAS Gupta, J., - (1.) After stating facts proceeded as follows:-
(2.) Two points arise for my consideration. Firstly, is the conduct of Mr. Walker in issuing the letter of the 21st April, 1950, in accordance with the provisions of the West Bengal Jute Goods Act of 1950. This is a pure point of law. Secondly, is the conduct of Mr. Walker bona fide This is a question of fact which shall have to decide on the facts and circumstances which are before me.
(3.) When and under what circumstances the Court would be justified in rescinding an Executive Order has been the subject-matter for consideration by the Court of Appeal in some recent decisions. In Amulya Pal v. R.N. Roy, 54 C.W.N. 350 (1950) , Mr. Justice S.N. Banerjee sitting with the Chief Justice Harries observed as follows:- "The Respondent must act within the four corners of the authority given him by the Act, and cannot act beyond that authority." In the case of Patri Shaw v. R.N. Roy, 54 C.W.N. 855 (1950) , Mr. Justice Banerjee sitting with the Chief Justice Harries also expressed the same view. The position has been made clear and put beyond all doubts in the last of the three decisions [ A.C. Mohamed v. Sailendra Nath Mitra, 54 C.W.N. 642 (1950) in which Mr. Justice Banerjee sitting with Chief Justice Harries again observed as follows:- "It was further contended before us that the order was not made by the Government in good faith. There is no doubt that if the order made is a colourable exercise of the power given by the Act, the Court has jurisdiction to set aside the order. But it is not competent to the Courts to investigate the grounds of the reasonableness of the decision in the absence of an allegation of bad faith. If it were not so, it would mean that the Courts would be made responsible for carrying on the Executive Government of this country on these important matters, Legislature, which authorises this regulation, commits to the executive the discretion to decide and with that discretion, if bona fide exercised, no Court can interfere. All that the Court can do is to see that the : power which it is claimed to exercise is one which falls within the four corners of the powers given by the legislature and to set that those powers are exercised in good faith. Apart from that, the Courts hate no power at all to inquire into the reasonableness, the policy, the sense, or any other aspect of the transaction.";