Conditional legislation in municipal boundary notifications excludes implied oral hearing unless the statute expressly provides one.

Power to constitute or alter a municipal area by notification under section 3 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 was treated as conditional legislation. Once the draft notification was published, objections were received and considered, and the final notification was issued, the statutory procedure stood satisfied. In such a legislative process, no implied right to an oral hearing or application of audi alteram partem arises unless expressly provided by statute. The Court also stated that the High Court could not disregard a binding co-ordinate Bench ruling or substitute its view for the Government's legislative choice on inclusion or exclusion of areas.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Government's action under section 3 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 in constituting a municipal corporation was a legislative function not amenable to natural justice, and whether the High Court could require reconsideration and fresh hearing while setting aside none of the notification.

Analysis: The power exercised under section 3 was treated as conditional legislation. Once the draft notification was published, objections were received and considered, and the final notification was issued, the statutory requirements stood satisfied. In such a legislative process, no implied duty to afford an oral hearing or to follow the audi alteram partem rule arises unless the statute expressly provides for it. The Court further held that the High Court could not disregard a binding co-ordinate Bench decision on the same statutory scheme, and it was not open to the Court to substitute its own view for the Government's legislative choice regarding the inclusion or exclusion of areas.

Conclusion: The High Court's directions for reconsideration and fresh hearing were unsustainable, and the notification was not liable to be interfered with on the grounds urged.

Final Conclusion: The Government's decision under section 3 was upheld as a valid exercise of legislative power, and judicial interference on natural justice grounds was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute confers power to constitute or alter a municipal area by notification as conditional legislation, compliance with the prescribed publication-and-objection procedure is sufficient, and courts cannot import a further right of hearing or review the merits of the legislative choice.

---