Report No. 30

130. Whether change in the law required.-

We have carefully considered the question whether a change in the law is required. Our conclusion is that the propositions emerging from Khosla's case are consistent with the two Travancore cases on which the Second Report of the Law Commission was based, and do not go beyond the intendment of those decisions.

The particular situation involved in Khosla's case was, no doubt, not in issue at that time, but there is nothing in those decisions, which is inconsistent with the test of contractual obligation applied in Khosla's case . As we have attempted to show, as early as 1955, the test was referred to by the Supreme Court 1, and it has been applied and expounded in several decisions under the Act of 1956 as also under Article 286 2.

As new facts came up, naturally the principles laid down in earlier decisions had to be elaborated, and their various aspects and implications made more manifest. But this is a familiar process. In a matter pertaining to the Constitution or relating to a status purporting to formulate principles for applying constitutional provisions, judicial exigencies cannot be avoided.

1. See para. 71, supra.

2. Paras. 75, 78 to 82, and 92 to 100, supra.