Rajasthan Government passed an Act restricting the use of sound amplifiers. The Act is challenged on the ground that it dealt with a matter which fell in entry of list I (Union list) which reads "post and telegraphs, tel

The facts of the given situation are similar to the case of G. Chawla v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1959 SC 544 . The Rajasthan Legislature passed a law restricting the use of sound amplifiers. The law was challenged on the ground that it dealt with a matter which fell in entry 31 of List I which reads: "Post and telegraphs, telephones, wireless broadcasting and other like forms of communication", and, therefore, the State Legislature was not competent to pass it. The Supreme Court rejected this argument on the ground that the object of the law was to prohibit unnecessary noise affecting the health of public and not to make a law on broadcasting, etc. Therefore, the pith and substance of the law was "public health" and not "broadcasting". Therefore, in the given situation, the pith and substance rule can be applied. According to this rule, where a law in reality and substance falls within an entry on which the legislature which enacted that law is competent to legislate, then such law shall not become invalid merely because it incidentally touches a matter outside the competence of legislature.