Emergency ordinance power upheld where Special Courts were activated by local necessity and revisional jurisdiction was excluded.

The Governor-General's emergency ordinance power under paragraph 72 of Schedule 9 of the Government of India Act, 1935 was described as wide enough to make ordinances for peace and good government in an emergency, with the existence of the emergency left to his judgment. Provisions allowing Special Courts to be brought into force locally when the Provincial Government considered it necessary were treated as valid conditional legislation, not an impermissible delegation of legislative power. The exclusion of revisional jurisdiction was also upheld, as the constitutional scheme permitted the lawful assignment of classes of cases to Special Courts and did not bar such executive discretion. The Ordinance was therefore not ultra vires.

---

---

Issues: Whether Ordinance II of 1942 was within the Governor-General's emergency power, and whether the provisions enabling Special Courts to be brought into operation and to be selected by local executive orders were invalid as impermissible delegation or as offending the High Court's revisional jurisdiction.

Analysis: The emergency power under paragraph 72 of Schedule 9 of the Government of India Act, 1935 authorised the Governor-General to make ordinances for peace and good government in cases of emergency, and the existence of the emergency was for him to judge. The Ordinance could validly provide in advance for Special Courts to be brought into force locally when the Provincial Government considered it necessary; this was treated as conditional legislation, not delegation of legislative power. The exclusion of revisional jurisdiction was also upheld because the Act treated Ordinances made under the emergency power as included within references to laws of the appropriate Legislature, and nothing in the constitutional scheme forbade the executive from being given a lawful discretion to assign classes of cases to Special Courts.

Conclusion: The Ordinance was not ultra vires, and the challenge to the validity of the impugned provisions failed.

---