Existing law under Article 372 protects sovereign-issued regulations with binding force and preserves substantive rights against executive override.

Pre-Constitution instruments issued by a sovereign authority in a princely State were treated as existing law under Article 372 because their substance showed a binding normative character. The Court applied a substance-over-form test and found that the Kalambandis regulated hereditary rights, succession, adoption, mutation, substitution, disqualification, and execution in a manner indistinguishable from statutory rules. They were therefore not mere administrative directions but regulations having the force of law. As existing law, they could not be displaced by a later executive order, and the appellant's right remained protected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Kalambandis governing the appellant's monthly payment were existing law or regulations having the force of law within the meaning of Article 372 of the Constitution.

Analysis: The relevant test was whether the impugned instruments, though not necessarily described as statutes, were issued by a sovereign authority competent to make law and whether their contents showed a normative and binding character. The Court held that in the former princely State the ruler retained supreme legislative authority, and orders issued by him could have the force of law. The two Kalambandis were examined for their substance and not merely their form or description. Their detailed provisions concerning hereditary rights, succession, adoption, mutation, substitution, disqualification, and execution showed that they regulated civil rights and obligations in a manner indistinguishable from statutory rules. They were therefore more than mere administrative directions and were saved as existing law under Article 372.

Conclusion: The Kalambandis were regulations having the force of law and constituted existing law under Article 372; the impugned executive order could not extinguish the appellant's right.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the High Court's dismissal was set aside, and appropriate relief was directed to be granted to the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: A pre-Constitution order or regulation issued by a sovereign authority in a princely State, if it has a binding normative character and regulates substantive rights, is existing law within Article 372 and cannot be displaced by a mere executive order.

---