Report No. 60
3.45. Ordinances as falling within "enactment".-
Since an Ordinance is "promulgated" and not "enacted", the Rangoon High Court observed1 that an Ordinance is not an "enactment", and the High Court felt "considerable hesitation" in holding that the repeal of an Ordinance would attract the usual provisions regarding repeal of enactments. It has now been held that the expression "enactment" includes an Ordinance, so that section 8 applies where a Central Act repeals and re-enacts an Ordinance made by the President.2
1. S.K. Roy Chowdhury v. King, AIR 1941 Rang 1 (4) (Roberts C.J.).
2. Hareobhai v. State, AIR 1967 Guj.227 (245), para. 29.
Back
