1997(9) Supreme 184
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Assam High Court)
Dr. A.S. Anand & K. Venkataswami, JJ.
Mahesh Kumar Saharia -Appellant
versus
State of Nagaland & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3423 of 1984
Decided on 14-10-1997
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant, Sunil Gupta, Mrs. Anjali Verma, Nikhil M. Sakhardande, Advocates for M/s. J.B. Dadachanji & Co., Advocates.
For the Respondents, K. Parasaran, P.K. Goswami, Sr. Advocates, C.K. Sasi, Kailash Vasdev, Advocates.
Held : that Section 20 (supra) of the Central Act provided that after the commencement of the said Act, it shall not be competent for any State to take over the management or control of any industrial undertaking under any law which authorises a State Government so to do. It is also an admitted position that inasmuch as by Section 2 (supra) read with Item 36 (i) of the First Schedule (supra) of the Central Act, it has been declared that in the public interest, the Union Government should take control of plywood industry, the State Legislature, therefore, cannot legislate with regard to the management or control of such industry. (Para 9)
Section 3 of the State Act stated that all the shares of the Company other than those already held by the Government stood transferred to and vested in the State Government. In consequence of such vesting of the shares, the Government naturally exercises rights as shareholder and incidentally acquires the control and management of the Company. But that will not fall under the mischief of Section 20 of the Central Act because Section 20 prohibits the State Government from taking over management or control dehors ownership of the undertaking. The Central Act is concerned with the control and management of the undertaking and not with its ownership. By acquiring ownership, incidentally management and control of the Company also vests with that, it will be incidental and such an exercise of legislature power is not prohibited under Section 20 of the Central Act. Notwithstanding the taking over of the Company by the State Government still if the Central Government finds scope to exercise their power under Section 20 of the Central Act, it is open to them to do so. (Para 10)
(ii) PRECEDENTS-Binding effect of a decision-Does not depend upon whether a particular argument was considered therein or not provided that the point with reference to which an argument was subsequently advanced was actually decided-Decision of Constitution Bench in Ishwari Khetan s case, consistently followed/applied upto this date, does not require reconsideration. (Paras 12 and 13)
JUDGMENT
K. Venkataswami, J.-The appellant, formerly a shareholder and Managing Director of the Nagaland Forest Products Limited (hereinafter called the "Company"), challenged the vires of Nagaland Forest Products Ltd. (Acquisition of Shares) Ordinance, 1981 and Nagaland Forest Products Ltd. (Acquisition of Shares) Act, 1982, which replaced the Ordinance (hereinafter called the "State Act"), contending inter alia that the said legislations were ultra vires the powers of Nagaland State Legislature in view of Section 20 of the Industries (Development & Regulation) Act, 1951 (hereinafter called the "Central Act").
2. Pursuant to a contract entered into between late Shri Ram Gopal Saharia, father of the appellant and the Government of Nagaland dated 24.4.1972 to establish a plywood factory in the territory of Nagaland on the terms and conditions stipulated therein, the Company was incorporated. The authorised share capital of the Company was Rs. 50,00,000/- divided into (i) 20,000/- (6% cumulative redeemable) preference shares of Rs. 100/- each (ii) 15,000/- G class equity shares of Rs. 100/- each and (iii) 15,000/- S class equity shares of Rs. 100/- each. G and S class equity shares carried the same rights. It appears that the appellant s group, on the one hand and the Government of Nagaland on the other hand, subscribed 50% each of the equity shares. The Company after obtaining necessary certificate of commencement of business on 22.7.1972, as required under the Central Act, commenced its business thereafter. The father of the appellant was the first Managing Director of the Company. After the death of his father, the appellant became the Managing Director some time in 1975. A Cabinet ranking Minister of the Government of Nagaland was the Chairman of the Company since its inception except during Governor s Rule.
3. While so, on December 14, 1981, the Deputy Commissioner, Mon District, directed the manager, Nagaland Forest Product Limited to close down the plywood factory on 14.12.1981 till further orders. It was followed by Ordinance 1 of 1981 which enabled the State Government to take over the assets, books of accounts, registers etc. of the Company. The Ordinance came into force on 17.12.1981. As noticed earlier, the Ordinance was replaced by the Act. The appellant challenged the Ordinance initially and subsequently by amending the petition appropriately, the Act was also challenged.
4. Before the High Court, the Act was challenged on various grounds but before us the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Mr. Sunil Gupta, confined his attack to the lack of legislative competence based on Section 20 of the Central Act. In other words, the contention was that taking over of the assets (Acquisition of Shares of the Company) amounts to taking over of management/control of the Company, which field is occupied by Parliament as contemplated by Section 20 of the Central Act.
The High Court in its considered and reasoned judgment rejected all the contentions and observed thus while rejecting the contention based on lack of legislative competence, which alone was pressed before us:-
"The Act was not enacted for taking over management or control of the company by the Nagaland State Government. In pith and substance it was enacted to acquire the S class shares of the Company. If an attempt was made to take over management or control of any industrial undertaking in a declared industry indisputably the bar of Section 20 of the IDRA would inhibit exercise of such executive power. However, if pursuant to a valid legislation for acquisition of scheduled undertaking the management stands transferred to the acquiring body it cannot be said that this would be in violation of Section 20. Section 20 does not preclude or forbid a State legislature exercising legislative power under an entry other than Entry 24 of List II, and if an exercise of that legislative powers, to wit, acquisition or shares of a company owning an industrial undertak
Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills (P) Ltd. & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Orissa Cement Ltd. & Ors. v. State of Orissa & Ors.
Indian Aluminium Company Ltd. & Anr. v. Karnataka Electricity Board & Ors.
Dalmia Industries Ltd. & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Anr.
Ajay Kumar Singh & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors.
Mahabir Sugar Mills Ltd. & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Smt. Somavanti & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
T. Govindaraja Mudaliar etc. etc. v. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.