``The amending Act has imposed an unreasonable restriction on the fundamental rights of the petitioners and to that extent, it is ultra vireos the Constitution. There would not be a total ban on the slaughter of bulls or bullocks above the age of 16 years,'' the Court observed while disposing of four petitions by a common judgment.

The petitioner, Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab, had contended that the provisions of the Act (banning the slaughter of bulls and bullocks) interfere with the petitioners' fundamental right to carry on business. Contending that the Act was violative of provisions contained in Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, the petitioners prayed thatprovisions of the Gujarat Act 4 of 1994 be declared as illegal and unconstitutional.

But the State in its affidavit contended that the total ban was imposed for the interest of the general public, and that it sought to impose only ``reasonable restrictions'' on the fundamental rights of the petitioners.

The State government affidavit contended that the objective of the total ban was to protect and preserve cow and its progeny they provide cost-free and rich manure. Besides, it was contended that the Amending Act was protected under Article 31C of the Constitution as it had got the President's assent.

Therefore, it was outside the challenge of being violative of provisions of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution, it was contended. However, the court observed, ``The State is to prohibit the slaughter of milch and draught cattle only.''

``Any law, which wants to get the protection of Article 31C read with Article 48, should be in relation to cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle,'' theCourt observed.