General Clauses Act, 1897
Section 24: Continuation of orders, etc., issued under enactments repealed and re-enacted
Where any [Central Act] or Regulation, is, after the commencement of this Act, repealed and re-enacted with or without modification, then, unless it is otherwise expressly provided any [appointment notification], order, scheme, rule, form or bye-law, [made or] issued under the repealed Act or Regulation, shall, so far as it is not inconsistent with the provisions re-enacted, continue in force, and be deemed to have been [made or] issued under the provisions so re-enacted, unless and until it is superseded by any [appointment notification,] order, scheme, rule, form or bye-law, [made or] issued under the provisions so re-enacted [and when any [Central Act] or Regulation, which, by a notification under section 5 or 5A of the 4Scheduled Districts Act, 1874, (14 of 1874) or any like law, has been extended to any local area, has, by a subsequent notification, been withdrawn from the re-extended to such area or any part thereof, the provisions of such Act or Regulation shall be deemed to have been repealed and re-enacted in such area or part within the meaning of this section].
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 15 October 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 24
- Dr. Abraham Patani of Mumbai & Anr v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
- Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. v. Coastal Marine Constructions & Engineering Ltd.
- Union of India and Another v. M/S. Kumho Petrochemicals Company Limited and Another
- M/S. Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mills v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Anr.
- J. Thansiama v. State of Mizoram & Ors.
- M/S. Fibre Boards (P) Ltd. Bangalore v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore
- Smt. Rasila S. Mehta v. Custodian, Nariman Bhavan, Mumbai
- G. Sekar v. Geetha & Ors
- J.K. Industries Ltd. & Anr v. Union of India and Ors.
- Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad and Anr. v. I.T.C. Ltd.
- M/S. Parle Biscuits (P) Ltd. v. The State of Bihar and Ors.
- Ramakrishna Vivekananda Mission v. State of West Bengal and Ors.
- Vithal Y. Galtonde v. Union of India and Anr.
- State of Punjab v. Harnek Singh
- Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd. Etc Etc. v. Union of India
- Shri Harish Tandon v. The Addl. District Magistrate, Allahabad, U.P. and Ors.
- Poonjabhai Varmalidas v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad
- Jagir Singh v. Ranbir Singh & Anr.
- Neel & Nirenjan Majumdar v. The State of West Bengal
- Mohd. Hussain Umar Kochra Etc. v. K. S. Dalipsinghji & Anr., Etc.
- Harishchandra v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- Mohan Lal Goenka and Another v. The State of West Bengal
- The Chief Inspector of Mines and Another v. Lala Karam Chand Thapar Etc.
- The Brihan Maharashtra Sugar Syndicate Ltd. v. Janardan Ramchandra Kulkarni and Others