SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
5th February, 1962
B.P. SINHA, C.J.I., K. SUBBA RAO, N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR, J.R. MUDHOLKAR AND T.L. VENKATARAMA AYYAR, JJ.
Calcutta Gas Company (Proprietary) Ltd., Appellant
Versus
State of W.B. and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No, 138 of 1961.
Advocates appeared
Mr. M. C. Setalvad, Attorney-General for India (M/s. B. R. L. Iyengar and B. P. Maheshwari, Advocates, with him), for Appellant; Sir S. M. Bose, Advocate General for the State of West Bengal and Mr. B. Sen, Senior Advocate (M/s. P. K. Chatterjee, S. C. Bose, Milon Bannerji and P. K. Bose, Advocates with them), for Respondents Nos. 1 to 4.
-held, ordinarily personal or individual right of petitioner himself would be considered for enforcement. But this rule may have to be relaxed in cases of some writs like habeas corpus or quo-warranto.
-see decision in Calcutta Gas Co. Ltd. v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1962 SC 1044=(1962) 2 SCA 147=(1963) I SCJ 106.
Key Points: - The appellant had locus standi under Article 226 because its legal rights under the management agreement were infringed (!) (!) . - Entry 25 of List II and Entry 24 of List II together regulate the gas industry, with gas and gas-works falling within State legislative competence (!) (!) . - The impugned Act was within the legislative competence of the West Bengal State Legislature under Entry 25 of List II and was validly made (!) (!) .
Judgment
SUBBA RAO, J. : This appeal by special leave is against the Judgment and Order dated November15, 1960, of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta dismissing the petition filed by the appellant under Art. 226 of the Constitution, and it raises the constitutional validity of the Oriental Gas Company Act, 1960, (W. B. Act XV of l960), hereinafter called the "impugned Act".
2. The facts that have given rise to this appeal may, be briefly stated. The Oriental Gas Company was originally, consituated by a deed of settlement dated April 25, 1853, by the name of the Oriental Gas Company, and it was subsequently registered in England under the provisions of the English Joint Stock Companies Act,1862. By Act V of 1857 passed by the Legislative Council of India, it was empowered to lay pipes in Calcutta and its suburbs and to excavate the streets for the said purpose. By Acts of the Legislative Council of India passed from time to time special powers were conferred on the said Company. In 1946 Messrs. Soorujmul Nagarmull, a firm carrying on business in India, purchased 98 per cent of the shares of the said Oriental Gas Company Limited. The said firm floated a limited liability Company named the Calcutta Gas Co. (Proprietary) Limited and it was registered in India with its registered office at Calcutta. On July 24, 1948, under an agreement entered into between the Oriental Gas Company and the Calcutta Gas Company, the latter was appointed the manager of the former Company in India for a period of 20 years from July 5, 1948. The Oriental Gas Company is the owner of the industrial undertaking, inter alia, for the production, manufacture, supply, distribution and sale of fuel gas in Calcutta. The Calcutta Gas Company, by virtue of the aforesaid arrangement, was in charge of its general management for a period of 20 years for remuneration. The West Bengal Legislature passed the impugned Act and it received the assent of the President on October 1, 1960. On October 3, 1960, the West Bengal Government issued three notifications - the first declaring that the said Act would come into force on October 3, 1960, the second containing the rules framed under the Act, and the third specifying October 7, 1960, as the date with effect from which the State Government would take over for a period of five years the management and control of the undertaking of the Oriental Gas Company for the purposes of, and in accordance with, the provisions of the said Act. The appellant i. e., the Calcutta Gas Company, filed a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court for West Bengal at calcutta for appropriate writs for restraining the State Government from giving effect to the said Act and for quashing the said notifications. Respondents 1 to 4 to the petition were the State of West Bengal and the concerned officers, and respondent 5 was the Oriental Gas Company Limited. In the petition, the appellant contested the consitutional validity of the Act on various grounds, and in the counter-affidavit, the contesting respondents, i. e., respondents 1 to 4, sought to sustain its validity and also questioned the maintainability of the petition at the instance of the appellant. Ray, J., gave the following findings on the contention raised before him : (1) The appellant has no legal right to maintain the petition; (2) the appellant cannot question the validity of the Act on the ground that its provisions infringed his fundamental rights under Arts. 14, 19 and 31 in view of Art,31A (1) (b) of the Constitution; (3) the West Bengal Legislature had the Legislative competence to pass the impugned Act by virtue of entry 42 of List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution; (4) entry 25 of List II also confers sufficient authority and power on the State Legislature to make laws affecting gas and gas-works; and (5) even if the Act incidentally trenches upon any production aspect, the pith and substance of the legislation is gas and gas-works within the
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.