MEHROTRA, C. J.: By these petitions the validity of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District (Application of Laws) Regulation, 1952 (Regulation No. V of 1952) and the notification issued by the Governor of Assam in the year 1961 under the said Regulation has been challenged (2) Briefly the facts are that the peti­tioners are residents of the United Khasi and Jaintia Hills District. They possess still for preparation of liquor from millet. The peti­tioners obtained some permits from one Jor Manik who was the Siem of Mylliem. The petitioners resolved an order passed by the Superintendent of Excise, United Khasi and Jaintia Hills to the effect that as the permits were from the unauthorised person inasmuch as Mr. Jor Manik was not a duly appointed Siem of Mylliem, those permits could not be renewed and further that the petitioners should stop their still with immediate effect. The permits granted by the acting Siem were, how­ever, not disturbed. The acting Siem, accord­ing to the petitioners, had been realising excise duty or fee 01 tax from the still producing liquor. The letter sent by the Superintendent of Excise, United Khasi and Jaintia Hills say that the application of the petitioner for renewal of his still license cannot be consider­ed as he was producing liquor under an invalid license issued by unauthorised persons and the petitioner was asked to stop distilling liquor immediately. (3) In the counter-affidavit it Is staled that the order was in fact passed by the Deputy Commissioner It was only communicated to the petitioners by the Superintendent of Excise, United Khasi-Jaintia Hills, Shillong. (4) Mainly the point raised by the peti­tioners is that the Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act, 1910 has not been extended to the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District and as such there is no provision of law under which the petitioners can be restrained from producing liquor and that the acting Siem had no power of realising excise duty from the petitioner. It is necessary to set out the back-ground under which the notification dated the 8th September 1961 has been issued by the Governor of Assam extending the provisions of the Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act, 1910 to the United Khasi Jaintia Hills District. (5) Prior to the 15th August 1947 the Khasi States had twenty-five Chiefs who had limited powers. (5) Prior to the 15th August 1947 the Khasi States had twenty-five Chiefs who had limited powers. After India became a Dominion on the 15th August 1947 the paramountcy of the British Government lapsed and a Federation was established by the Chiefs. On the 17th August 1947 the Instru­ment of Accession by these twenty-five Chiefs was accepted by the Governor-General of India and this brought about a new relationship between the Chiefs and the Government of India. The Chiefs under this Instrument acceded to the Dominion of India by which all existing arrangements between the Govern­ment of India and the State of Assam on the one hand and the Khasi States on the other continued to be in force until new or modi­fied arrangements were made subject to certain exceptions as to judicial and administrative powers. So far as administra­tive powers were concerned. only excise, forests, land and water rights and the revenue derived therefrom were excepled and the rest of the functions were to be common with the Central or the State Government In the matter of legislation, the Dominion Legislature and the Assam Legislature had the power to pass laws concerning subjects of common interest with the proviso that some machinery should be devised for representa­tion in the Assam legislature. This position continued till the Constitution came into force on the 26th January, 1950 By the Constitu­tion the Khasi Stales were merged into the State of Assam and the power of the Chiefs so far as administration is concerned, came to an end. By Article 244(2) of the Constitu­tion special provisions contained in the Sixth Schedule thereof were to apply to the administration of the Tribal Areas in the State of Assam. Thus, after the Constitution came into force the governance of these States was to be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Sixth Schedule. By paragraphs 1 and 20 of the Sixth Schedule the whole tribal area was divided into autonomous districts. Paragraph 19 deals with the transitional provisions and paragraph 21 with the amendment of the Schedule. (6) Paragraph 12 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution is as follows: "12(1). By paragraphs 1 and 20 of the Sixth Schedule the whole tribal area was divided into autonomous districts. Paragraph 19 deals with the transitional provisions and paragraph 21 with the amendment of the Schedule. (6) Paragraph 12 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution is as follows: "12(1). Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution: (a) no Act of the Legislature of the State In respect of any of the matters specified in paragraph 3 of this Schedule as matters with respect to which a District Council or a Regional Council may make laws, and no Act of the Legislature of the State prohibiting or restricting the consumption of any non-distilled alcoholic liquor shall apply to any autono­mous district or autonomous region unless in either case the District Council for such dis­trict or having jurisdiction over such region by public notification so directs, and the Dis­trict Council in giving such direction with respect to any Act may direct that the Act shall in its application to such district or region or any part thereof have effect subject to such exceptions or modifications as it thinks fit; (b) the Governor may, by public notifica­tion, direct that any Act of Parliament or of the Legislature of the State to which the provi­sions of clause (a) of this sub-paragraph do not apply shall not apply to an autonomous district or an autonomous region, or shall ap­ply to such district or region or any part there­of subject to such exceptions or modifications as he may specify in the notification. (2) Any direction given under sub-para­graph (1) of this paragraph may be given so as to have retrospective effect." Paragraph 19 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution is as follows: "19. (2) Any direction given under sub-para­graph (1) of this paragraph may be given so as to have retrospective effect." Paragraph 19 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution is as follows: "19. (1) As soon as possible after the commencement of this Constitution the Gover­nor shall take steps for the constitution of a District Council for each autonomous district in the State under this Schedule and, until a District Council is so constituted for an auto­nomous district, the administration of such dis­trict shall be vested in the Governor and the following provisions shall apply to the adminis­tration of the areas within such district instead of the foregoing provisions of this Schedule, namely: (a) no Act of Parliament or of the Legis­lature of the State shall apply to any such area unless the Governor by public notifica­tion so directs; and the Governor in giving such a direction with respect to any Act may direct that the Act shall, in its application to the area or to any specified part thereof, have effect subject to such exceptions or modifica­tions as he thinks fit; (b) the Governor may make regulations for the peace and good Government of any such area and any regulations so made may repeal or amend any Act of Parliament or of the Legislature of the State or any existing law which it for the time being applicable to such area. (2) Any direction given by the Governor under clause (a) of sub-paragraph (1) of this paragraph may be given so as to have retros­pective effect. (3) All regulations made under clause (b) of sub-paragraph (1) of this paragraph shall be submitted forthwith to the President and, until assented to by him. shall have no effect." Although after the commencement of the Constitution the tribal areas merged into the State of Assam, the District Councils have been formed for each of the Autonomous Districts. The District Councils have been given certain legislative and administrative powers. Besides the matter in respect of which the District Council has got legislative powers, the Slate Legislature of Assam has powers to legislate on the subjects enumerated in List II of the Seventh Schedule. Paragraph 12(1)(b) of the Sixth Schedule authorises the Governor by public notification to prohibit the applica­tion of any Act of Parliament or of the Legis­lature of the State to which clause (a) of sub-paragraph (1) does not apply. Paragraph 12(1)(b) of the Sixth Schedule authorises the Governor by public notification to prohibit the applica­tion of any Act of Parliament or of the Legis­lature of the State to which clause (a) of sub-paragraph (1) does not apply. Thus unless the Acts of Parliament or of the State's legis­lature are notified by the Governor not to apply to this area, all the Acts passed by the Parlia­ment or the Legislature of Assam will auto­matically apply to the tribal area, except the matters to which paragraph 12(1) (a) applies. Paragraph 19 lays down that till the constitu­tion of the District Council, the administra­tion of this area is to vest in the Governor and the provisions mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of paragraph 19(1) shall apply to the administration of the area instead of the earlier provisions of the Sixth Schedule. Clause (a) of paragraph 19(1) of the Sixth Schedule expressly excludes the applica­tion of any Act of Parliament or of the Legis­lature of the State to this area and empowers the Governor by notification to apply any such Act for the purpose of administering this area. Paragraph 19(1) (b) confers legislative power on the Governor to make regulations for the peace and good government of any such area. This power can be exercised to repeal or amend not only any Act of Parliament or of the Legis­lature of the State but any other existing law which is for the time being applicable to such area. The Governor in the exercise of this power passed on the 22nd April 1952 the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District (Applica­tion of Laws) Regulation, 1952 This Regula­tion was passed before the constitution of the District Council and received the assent of the President. The Regulation came into force at once Clause of the Regulation reads as follows "2. The Governor in the exercise of this power passed on the 22nd April 1952 the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District (Applica­tion of Laws) Regulation, 1952 This Regula­tion was passed before the constitution of the District Council and received the assent of the President. The Regulation came into force at once Clause of the Regulation reads as follows "2. Application of Laws to United Khasi Jaintia Hills District The Governor of Assam may, by notification in the Official Gazette, direct that any of the laws specified in the Schedule annexed to this Regulation, as amended up-to-date, shall extend to, and have effect, in so much areas of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District which were known as the Khasi States immediately before the commence­ment of the Constitution of India, or part thereof, hereinafter referred to as 'the said areas', and for this purpose different areas and different dates may be specified for different laws: Provided that such laws in their applica­tion to the said areas shall he subject to the same exceptions or modifications as they are subject to in the rest of the areas of the said United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District." A number of Acts were mentioned in this Regulation, which could be applied to this area by notification issued by the Governor of Assam from time to time. The Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act, 1910 was also mention­ed in this notification (7) On the 8th September 1961 the Gover­nor of Assam issued a notification in the exercise of the powers conferred under sec­tion 2 of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District (Application of Laws) Regulation, 1952 extending the Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act 1910 to so much areas of (he United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District which were known as the Khasi States immediately before the commencement, of the Constitution, subject to notification under clause (a) of sub-paragraph (l) of Paragraph 12 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution by the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District Council. This notification was to come into effect from the 1st October 1961. This notification was to come into effect from the 1st October 1961. It is the validity of this notification which has been challenged by the petitioner (8) It should be noticed that in the year 1952 the District Council was constituted in respect of the Autonomous Khasi-Jaintia Hills and thus when this notification was issued in the year 1961, paragraph 19 of the Sixth Sche­dule to the Constitution could not be invoked by the Governor of Assam. The legislative power of the Governor under paragraph 19(1) (b) has come to an end. It is contended that as the power to legislate conferred on the Gover­nor under paragraph 19(1) (b) has come to an end. the regulation stands repealed and the Governor of Assam had no longer any power to apply any of the laws referred lo in the said regulation lo this area It is urged that the notification issued in 1961 is itself a subordinate legislation and when the principal legislation, namely the Regulation came lo an end, the subordinate legislation has lapsed It is also urged that the power to legislate was given to the Governor for carrying on the administration of this area during the transition period and to make regulations for the peace and good government of this area. As the administra­tion of the area no longer is to be carried on by the Governor of Assam, the District Council having been constituted, the Governor is not in a position to decide whether a particular Act is necessary for the maintenance of peace and good government in that area and thus the Regulation no longer is in existence It is further urged that the Regulation is a temporary legislation and after the formation of the District Council, the Regulation lapsed. It is also urged that the Regulation is invalid for excessive delegation of legislative function to the Governor of Assam. (9) The counsel for the State has contend­ed that the Regulation was a permanent legis­lation. Merely because the Governor was given power to legislate during the transition period, any law passed by him during this period will not automatically lapse after the period of transition There is nothing in paragraph 19 (1) (b) which limits the operation of the law passed by the Governor in the exercise of the said power to the period of transition. The regulation on its own force was not a tempo­rary legislation and thus unless the Regula­tion was invalid when it was passed, the noti­fication of 1961 is a valid notification. It is also urged that the Regulation did not delegate any legislative function to the Governor of Assam. It is a conditional legislation and the power has been given to the Governor of Assam to decide upon the area lo which and the time when the Act is to be applied. It is further contended that even if it be treated to be a delegated legislation, the legislature (in this case the Governor) has laid down the princi­ples and policy in the Act and what has been left to the Governor himself as an executive head is the application of the laws and thus it cannot be regarded as an excessive delega­tion (10) In our judgment it is not a case of conditional legislation inasmuch as the Gover­nor has not passed any legislation dealing with excise matters and leaving the time and place of its application to the executive authority, but has conferred a legislative power on the executive. The power to issue a notification under clause 2 of the Regulation is itself a legislative power, as held in the case of Chatturam v. Commr of Income-tax. Bihar. AIR 1947 FC 32. The facts of this case were that by an Order in Council dated 3rd March 193(5 Chotanagpur and Santal Parganas were declared to be 'partially excluded areas.' On the 26th May 1940, the Governor of Bihar issued a notification under section 92(1), Government of India Act, 1935. Bihar. AIR 1947 FC 32. The facts of this case were that by an Order in Council dated 3rd March 193(5 Chotanagpur and Santal Parganas were declared to be 'partially excluded areas.' On the 26th May 1940, the Governor of Bihar issued a notification under section 92(1), Government of India Act, 1935. applying certain Acts mentioned in the schedule to this area One of the questions which arose for consideration was about the nature of the notification issued by the Governor under sec­tion 92(2) of the Government of India Act, 1935 .Section 92 of the Government of India Act was in the following terms "(92) Administration of excluded areas and partially excluded areas (1) The execu­tive authority of a Province extends to excluded and partially excluded areas therein, but, notwithstanding anything in this Act, no Act of federal Legislature or of the Provincial Legislature shall apply to an excluded area or a partially excluded area, unless the Governor by public notification so directs, and the Governor in giving such a direction with res­pect to any Act may direct that the Act shall in its application to the area, or to any specified part thereof, have effect subject to such excep­tions or modifications as he thinks fit. (2) The Governor may make regulations for the peace and good government of any area in a Province which is for the time being an excluded area, or a partially excluded area, and any regulations so made may repeal or amend any Act of the Federal Legislature or of the Provincial Legislature, or any existing Indian law, which is for the time being ap­plicable to the area in question. Regulations made under this sub-section shall be submitted forthwith to the Governor-General and until assented to by him in his discretion shall have no effect and the provi­sions of this Part of this Act with respect to the power of His Majesty to disallow Acts shall, apply in relation to any such regulations assented to by the Governor-General as they apply in relation to Acts of a Provincial Legis­lature assented to by him. (3) The Governor shall, as respects any area in a Province which is for the time being an excluded area, exercise his functions in his discretion." It was held in this case that section 92(1) of the Government of India Act 1935 gave legis­lative power to the Governor in respect of the partially excluded areas. (11) Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of Hamdard Dawakhana v. Union of India AIR 1960 SC 564 have held as follows: "The distinction between conditional legis­lation and delegated legislation is this, that in the former the delegate's power is that of determining when a legislative declared rule of conduct shall become effective, and the latter involves delegation of rule making power which constitutionally may be exercised by the administrative agent. This means that the legis­lature having laid down the broad principles of its policy in the legislation can then leave the de­tails to be supplied by the administrative autho­rity. In other .words by delegated legislation the delegate completes the legislation by supplying details within the limits prescribed by the statute and in the case of conditional legisla­tion the power of legislation is exercised by the legislature conditionally leaving to the dis­cretion of an external authority the time and manner of carrying its legislation into effect as also the determination of the area to which it is to extend." The legislature in the present case had not completely exercised its legislative function and left the executive authority to make it effective. It was the case of an incomplete legislation, leaving it to the executive to complete it by issuing a notification and in order to determine the validity of the regulation, it will have to be considered whether the Governor exercising its legislative power under paragraph 19 of Sixth Schedule to the Constitution has laid down the broad principles of its policy and has left the details to be supplied by the executive authority or it has delegated its essential legislative function. It is, however, not necessary for the purposes of the present case to go into the question whether the Regulation when it was passed in the year 1952 was ultra vires or not. It is, however, not necessary for the purposes of the present case to go into the question whether the Regulation when it was passed in the year 1952 was ultra vires or not. Assuming that on the date when it was passed it was a valid Regulation inasmuch as the period of transition would last for sometime and thus it was left to the Governor of Assam as the executive head of the State during that period to choose when and where the Acts mentioned in the schedule were to apply, but as the power of applying the law to any particular area is itself a legis­lative power delegated to the Governor of Assam, when the Governor ceases to have any legislative power, he cannot exercise that in­directly by resorting to the provisions of the Regulation. The only authority which could exercise that legislative power of making laws in respect of the excise matters in that area was the State of Assam. (12) Under item 51 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, "duties of excise on alcoholic liquors for human consumption manufactured or produced in the State" is a Stale subject. Further "Intoxicating Liquors, that is to say, the production, manu­facture, possession, transport, purchase, and sale, of intoxicating liquors" is a State subject vide item 8 of the List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. After the constitu­tion of the District Council on certain matters the District Council has been given power under the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution to legis­late. Thus the entire power of legislation is with the legislature of the State of Assam and the District Council after its formation, and the Governor himself has ceased to have any legislative competence under paragraph 19 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution. The Governor thus cannot create a separate Legis­lature by making a regulation and confer on the said Legislature power to legislate by issu­ing a notification. The notification thus cannot be sustained on the basis of the regulation made by the Governor in the year 1952. (13) In the case of State v. Babulal, Alii 1957 Raj. 28. the question which arose for consideration was whether the Police Act of 1801 was in force in the State of Rajasthan. The notification thus cannot be sustained on the basis of the regulation made by the Governor in the year 1952. (13) In the case of State v. Babulal, Alii 1957 Raj. 28. the question which arose for consideration was whether the Police Act of 1801 was in force in the State of Rajasthan. On the 24th January 1950 the Rajas than Adaptation of Central Laws Ordinance (4 of 1950) was promulgated by His Highness the Rajpramukh. A number of Central Ac Is were adapted to Rajasthan by virtue of section 3 of the Ordinance read with the Schedule. The Police Act (5 of 1861) was, however, m/l included in the Schedule when this Ordinance was passed. Section 4 of !he Ordinance gave power to the Rajpramukh by order notified in the Rajasthan Gazette, to add to, amend or vary the schedule to this Ordinance On (he 18th July 1950 after the coming in force of the Constitution, the Rajpramukh purporting to act under section 4 of the Rajasthan Adaptation of Central Laws Ordinance (4 of 1950) added the Police Act of 1861 in the Schedule to the Ordinance. It was this notification which was challenged. The contention raised was that after the coming in force of the Constitution on the 26th January 1950, the provisions of section 4 of the Ordinance stood repealed. The notifica­tion which was issued in July 1950 was in effect enacting a law and that could not be done by virtue of power conferred under sec­tion 4 of the Ordinance, as after the coming in force of the Constitution the only manner provided for making laws for this area was contained under Articles 285 and 212-A of the Constitution. This contention was accepted and we are in agreement with that view It was, however, held in that case on some other ground that the Police Act was in force in that area After the transition period came to an end. the Regulation by implication stood repealed. (14) The Regulation not being a condi­tional legislation, even though it may have been valid on the date when it was enacted as a permissible piece of delegated legislation, the delegate could not exercise its legislative func­tion at a time when the Governor himself lost the power to enact a regulation by virtue of the expiry of the period of transition. (15) The next point which bus been rais­ed by the counsel for the State is that apart from the notification, The Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act, 1910 under which action has been taken, is in force by its own force in the area in question. The argument is that the Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act 1910 was an existing law when the Constitution came into force and thus it remained in force in The State of Assam under Article 372 of the Constitution. After The Constitution came into force the area in question became a part of the State of Assam and thus the Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act, 1910 is a law in force in every part of Assam including the area in question. By virtue of Article 244 of the Constitution the administration of the tribal areas is to be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Sixth Schedule and there is nothing in the said Schedule which lays down that the laws in force in Assam will not be in force in that area Paragraphs 12 and 19 of the Sixth Sche­dule lo the Constitution are the only provisions which deal with the power of the Governor lo apply certain laws to this area. Paragraph 12 only gives power to the Governor by notifica­tion not lo apply obtain laws of the Parlia­ment or the State Legislature in that area or to apply them with certain modifications. Thus unless there is a notification by the Governor under paragraph 12 restricting the application of any laws of the Parliament or the State Legislature in that area, all laws in force in the State of Assam will automatically be in force in that area. Paragraph 19 is differently worded. It says that unless a particular law is applied to the area, it will not be applicable to that area But paragraph 19 only applies during the period of transition. After the constitution of the District Council, the provi­sions of the Sixth Schedule other than para­graph 19 will apply to the administration of this area. (16) The Eastern Bengal and Assam Ex­cise Act, 1910 was a law in force on the date of the commencement of the Constitution admittedly in the other parts of Assam. After the constitution of the District Council, the provi­sions of the Sixth Schedule other than para­graph 19 will apply to the administration of this area. (16) The Eastern Bengal and Assam Ex­cise Act, 1910 was a law in force on the date of the commencement of the Constitution admittedly in the other parts of Assam. The only question is whether M will be a law in force in the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills Districts which also became part of the State of Assam after j-the commencement of the Constitution. Terri­torially the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills are part of the State of Assam. Article 372(l) of the Constitution provides: "Notwithstanding The repeal by this Constitution of the enactments referred to in article 395 but subject to the other provisions of this Constitution, all the law in force in the territory of India immediately before the com­mencement of this Constitution shall continue in force therein until altered or repealed or amended by a competent Legislature or other competent authority." ,. As the Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act was a law in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of the Constitution, it shall continue to be in force therein notwithstanding The repeal of the Constitution (sic). The United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District is within the territory of India. Explanation 1 to Article 372 provides: "The expression 'law in force' in this article shall include a law passed or made by a Legislature or other competent authority in , the territory of India before the commence­ment of this Constitution and not previously repealed, notwithstanding that it or parts of it may not be then in operation either al all or in particular areas.'" This explanation makes it clear that even though this law may not have been in opera­tion prior lo the commencement of the Consti­tution in the United Khasi and Jaintia Hills area, nonetheless it will be a law in force. In the case of AIR 1057 Raj. 28, to which I have already referred. it was held that the 4 Police Act of 1861 was validly applied to the State of Rajasthan by The notification issued by the Rajpramukh on the 18th July, 1950. In the case of AIR 1057 Raj. 28, to which I have already referred. it was held that the 4 Police Act of 1861 was validly applied to the State of Rajasthan by The notification issued by the Rajpramukh on the 18th July, 1950. It was held that although the Police Act of 1861 was not in force in the State "of Rajasthan before the commencement of the Constitution, still as it was in force in some parts of the Indian territory, it was a law in force in the territory of India and thus acting under the provisions of the Police Act 1861 It could be applied to Rajasthan by an appro­priate notification under section 46 of the Police Act The notification which was issued by the Rajpramukh purporting to he one under S. 4 of the Rajasthan Adaptation of Central Laws Ordinance, was treated to be a notifica­tion under the Police Act applying the provi­sions of the Act to the Rajasthan Area. Even if the Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act is a law in force in the territory of India, the question still arises if it can be said to be operative in the territory of Khasi and Jaintia Hills as this area now forms part of the State of Assam with or without any notification applying the Act to this area or an Act of Legislature is required to apply the Act to this area. (17) Article 366(1) of the Constitution defines 'existing law' as meaning any law, Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule or regulation passed or made before the commencement of this Constitution by any Legislature, authority or person having power to make such a law, Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule or regulation. Although Art. 372(1) of the Constitution read with Explanation 1 thereto does not define the expression 'law in force' the 'existing law' and the 'law in force' for all practical purposes have the same connotation. The Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act was passed in the year 1910. Although Art. 372(1) of the Constitution read with Explanation 1 thereto does not define the expression 'law in force' the 'existing law' and the 'law in force' for all practical purposes have the same connotation. The Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act was passed in the year 1910. Under S. 1(3) of this Act as it existed when the Act was passed, it extends to the whole of Eastern Bengal and Assam, expect the Dibrugarh Frontier Tract in the Lakhimpur district, the Mikiri Hills tracts in the Nowgong and Sibsagar districts, the North Cachar sub­division of the Cachar district and the districts of the Garo Hills, the Khasi and Jaintia Hills, the Naga Hills, the Lushai Hills (and the Chittagong Hills tracts). Section 1(4) provides that the Provincial Govern­ment may. by notification extend, to any of the said excepted tracts and districts, or any part thereof, all or any of the provisions of this Act, and may modify the provisions so extended or restrict their operation in such manner as it thinks fit. By a notification issued under section 1(4) of the Act, the Act was extend; ed to some of the excepted areas mentioned in section 1(3). Unless it can be said that the word 'Assam' used in section 1(3) means and includes the entire present area of Assam, it cannot he said that the Act though in force in the territory of India was also operative in the area in question. Under Article 372(2) of the Constitution the President issued the Adapta­tion of Laws Order, 1950, which will herein­after be called 'the Adaptation Order'. The Adaptation Order defines the 'existing Central law' as meaning any law in force in the terri­tory of India immediately before the appoint­ed day, but does not include (i) an existing Provincial law; (ii) an existing State law; or (iii) an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom or any Order in Council, rule or other instrument made under such an Act. The 'existing Provincial law' means- (i) any Provincial Act or any Ordinance or Regulation made by Governor of a Province under the Government of India Act, 1935. The 'existing Provincial law' means- (i) any Provincial Act or any Ordinance or Regulation made by Governor of a Province under the Government of India Act, 1935. or (ii) Any rule, bye-law, regulation, order, notification or other- instrument made under any such Provincial Act, Ordinance or Regula­tion which, immediately before the appointed day, was a law in force in any Province or part thereof, and includes, with respect to a merged territory, any law in force in such territory immediately before the appointed day which was made for that territory or any part there­of by the Legislature or other competent autho­rity of the corresponding Indian State or under the Extra-Provincial Jurisdiction Act, 1947 The 'existing law' has been defined as meaning an existing Central law, existing Provincial law or existing State law. As the Assam Act in question was not passed by the Governor of a Province under the Government of India Act, 1935 it does not come within the definition of the 'existing Provincial law' under the Adaptation Order. But as it was a law in force in the territory of India immediately before the coming in force of the Constitution, it conies within the definition of the 'existing Central law' and thus it is an existing law within the meaning of the Adaptation Order. Paragraph 8 of the Adaptation Order is as follows: "Notwithstanding any amendment made by this Order in the extent clause of an existing Central or Provincial law, that law shall not be deemed to have been extended to any area to which it did not extend immediately before the appointed day; and a reference in that law lo any State or class of States shall not unless the context otherwise requires be deem­ed to include a reference to any part of that State or class of States to which that law did not ex lend immediately before the appointed day." Paragraph 10 lays down that in any existing Central or Provincial law references by what­ever form of words to Part A States shall not, and references by whatever form of words lo Part B States shall, include refer­ences to the territories, being part of the State of Assam, which, immediately before the appointed day. were known as the Khasi States. were known as the Khasi States. Reading these two paragraphs it is clear that although the territory of the State of Assam may now include the area of the Khasi States, still for the purpose of interpreting the word 'Assam' in the Act, it will not extend to the area other than the areas to which it ap­plies at the lime of its enactment and further that the description of the extent of the opera­tion of the Act will not include the Khasi States which forms part of the State of Assam. Paragraph 18 which is also relevant, rends as follows: "In any existing law, any reference by name or description to any territory shall, un­less the contrary intention appears or unless it has been, or is by this Order, otherwise expressly provided, be construed as a reference lo the territory which bore that name or answered to that description at the date when the enactment containing that name or description came into operation." In our opinion, therefore, the Eastern] Bengal and Assam Excise Act was not opera live in this area. (18) The next contention is that the noti­fication, though purporting to have been issued under the Regulation, will be deemed to lie one under section 1(4) of the Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act, 1910 and thus the Act will come into operation in the Khasi and Jaintia Hills. There are two difficulties in accepting this contention of the counsel for the .State, firstly, that the notification expressly has been issued under the provisions of the Regulation and it was never alleged before that this notification is one under section \ (4) of the Act. and, secondly, that there is no material before us to come to the conclusion that the Khasi and Jaintia Hills initially excepted from the operation of the Act under section 1(8) was the area which is now in question. Obviously the Khasi and Jaintia Hills mentioned in, section 1(3) could only refer to that part of the Khasi States which was a part of British India. The Act when passed in 1910 could not apply to the Khasi States which were not part of the British India and thus section 1(3) when it refers to the Khasi and Jaintia Hills, it could not refer to the area of the Khasi Hills outside the British India. The Act when passed in 1910 could not apply to the Khasi States which were not part of the British India and thus section 1(3) when it refers to the Khasi and Jaintia Hills, it could not refer to the area of the Khasi Hills outside the British India. It is not the case of the State that the area in question was part of the Province of Assam at the time when the Act was passed. In the result, there­fore, we allow these petitions and issue a direction to the opposite parties not to give effect to the notices which are purported to and been issued under the provisions of the Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act, 1910. Civil Rule 206/63 is allowed as indicated above, with cost. We assess the hearing fee at Rs. 100/-. We make no order as to cost in the other petitions. Petitions allowed.