K.K. Mathew JUDGMENT
K.K. Mathew, J.
1. The appellants filed a writ petition before the High Court of Gujarat challenging the validity of a notice issued by the Gujarat State Electricity Board, respondent No. 2, dated November 8, 1971, whereby respondent No. 2 purported to exercise the option of purchasing the electrical undertaking of appellant No. 1 under Section 6 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') add for a declaration that the provisions of Sections 6, 7 and 7A of the Act are ultra vires Articles 14, 19(1)(f), 19(1)(g) and 31 of the Constitution. The High Court dismissed the petition and this appeal, by certificate, is against that judgment.
2. The Government of the Province of Bombay granted a licence by notification dated November 16, 1922, under Section 3 of the Act known as the 'Godhra Electric Licence, 1922' in favour of Lady Sulochana Chinubhai and Company, Ahmedabad. The licence was signed on November 17, 1922 and the notification granting it was published in the Bombay Government Gazette dated November 23, 1922. The licence was transferred to the 1st appellant-company viz., the Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. The licence was for a period of 50 years initially from its commencement. The initial period of 50 years, according to the respondents, was to expire on the midnight intervening between the 15th and 16th November, 1972. The second respondent exercised the option to purchase the undertaking of the 1st appellant company by a notice dated November 8, 1971, under Section 6(1) of the Act by calling upon the appellants to sell the undertaking to it on the midnight intervening between the 15th and 16th of November, 1972. Thereafter, the Government of Gujarat issued a notification under Rule 115(2) of the Defence of India Rules taking over the management of the undertaking on November 18, 1973. On December 21, 1973 of the State Government handed over the undertaking to the 2nd respondent.
3. Before we proceed further, it would be convenient at this stage to note the amendment made in the Act by Act 32 of 1959. A comparison of the original Section 7 with Sections 6, 7 and 7A shows that the changes made by Sections 6, 7 and