Bapana, J. - (1.) In this petition the validity of the Notification. No. F. 1 (2) Rev./50, dated 14-61951, is challenged.
(2.) His Highness the Rajpramukh promulgated an Ordinance to provide for the protection of tenants from ejectment from their holdings on. 21-6-1949, as the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance 1949 (Ordinance No. 9 of 1949), in exercise of the power conferred upon His Highness the Rajpramukh by para. (3) of Article 10 of the Covenant by which the State of Rajasthan was formed. In Subsection (3) of Section 1 of the Ordinance it was laid down that the Ordinance "shall come into force at once and shall remain, in force for a period of two years unless this period is further extended by the Rajpramukh, by notification in the Rajasthan Gazette." In the Gazette of 18-6-1951, (Part IV-A, Vol. 3: No. 55), the following Notification was published "GOVERNMENT OP RAJASTHAN REVENUE DEPARTMENT. "NOTIFICATION. Jaipur, June 14, 1951. No. F. 1 (2) Rev./50.--In pursuance of Subsection (3) of Section 1 of the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance, 1949 (No. 9 of 1949), His Highness the Rajpramukh is pleased to extend the period for which the said Ordinance shall remain in force for a further term, of two years with effect from the 21st of June, 1951. By Order of His Highness the Rajpramukh, S.W. Shiveshwarkar, Chief Secretary to Government." The validity of this Notification is challenged, It is contended for the petitioner that after the coming into force of the Constitution of India, the Rajpramukh could only promulgate an Ordinance, as provided by Article 213 of the Constitution, in which case certain formalities mentioned in para. (2) of Article 213 had to be followed. It is urged that the Legislature met for the first time in March, 1952, in Rajasthan, and this Notification was not placed before the Legislative Assembly. It is also urged that the Notification purports to have been issued in the exercise of the power given by Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Ordinance No, 9 of 1949, and if so, it became a legislation by delegated authority.
(3.) The Notification does not say that it had been issued in exercise of the power given by Sub-section (3) of Section 1 of the Ordinance, In fact, Sub- section (3) of Section 1 does not purport to grant any power to the Raj Pramukh. That subsection declares, in the first place, the period for which the Ordinance shall remain in force, and by way of caution mentions that the period may be extended by the Rajpramukh. But the extension, if any, by the Rajpramukh would only be possible, if there was any authority in the Rajpramukh at the time the extension was to be made. On the date, when the Notification of 14-6-1951, was made the Constitution was in force; but the Legislative Assembly, which was the only House provided for Rajasthan, had not been constituted. Under Article 385, therefore, the same authority, which functioned as the legislative authority prior to the, Constitution, continued to exercise legislative powers, and under Article 10 of the Covenant, the Rajpramukh was vested with legislative powers.;