SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.N. RAY, C.J.I., K.K. MATHEW, Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, A. ALAGIRISWAMI AND A.C. GUPTA, JJ.
Sukhdev Singh and others. Appellants
Versus
Bhagatram Sardar Singh Raghuvanshi and another, Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 2137 and 1879 of 1972, 1655 of 1973 and 115 of 1974, D/- 21-2-1975.
(1) Civil Appeal No. 2137 of 1972.
(2) Civil Appeal No. 1655 of 1973.
The Oil & Natural Gas Commission, Appellant
Versus
The Association of Class II Officers, O.N.G.C. and others, Respondents.
(3) Civil Appeal No. 1879 of 1972.
The L.I.C. Ltd. and another. Appellants
Versus
Shaym Lal Sharma, Respondent.
(4) Civil Appeal No. 115 of 1974.
The Industrial Finance Corpn. Employees Association, Appellant
Versus
The Industrial Finance Corpn, and others, Respondents.
Advocates appeared
Mr. F. S. Nariman, Addl. Sol. Gen. (In C.A. No. 2137 of 1972) Mr. A. K. Sen, Sr. Advocate (In C.A. No. 1655 of 1973) (Mr. B. Dutta, Advocate with him), for Appellants. Mr. Pramod Swarup, Advocate ( In C.A. No. 1879 of 1972) for Appellant; Mr. M. K. Ramamurthy, Sr. Advocate, (M/s. Janardan Sharma and Jitendra Sharma, Advocates with him), for Appellant (In C.A. No, 115 of 1974). M/s. R. K. Garg, S. C. Agarwala, S. S. Bhatnagar and V. J. Francis, Advocates of M/s. Ramamurthy & Co. (In C.A. No. 2137 of 1972) for Respondent No, 1; Mr. M. K. Ramamurthy Sr. Advocate, (Mr. J. Ramamurthy, Advocate with him), for Respondents (In C.A. Nos.1655 of1973 and 1879 of 1972 and for Intervener (In C.A. No.1655 of 1973). Mr. F. S. Nariman Addl. Sol. Gen, of India (Mr. I. N. Shroff, Advocate with him), for Respondent No: 1 (In C.A. No. 115 of 1974), Mr. P. K. Pillai, Advocate, (In C.A. No. 2137 of 1972) for Intervener; Mr. F. S. Nariman Addl. Sol. Gen, of India (M/s V. J. Taraporewala, O. C. Mathur, Mohan Prasad Jha and K.J. John. Advocate with him), for Applicant/ Intervener (Air India).
Oil and Natural Gas Commission Act, 1959 - Section 12 and 13 - Industrial Finance Corporation Act, 1948 - Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 12 and 16 - Resolution of Government of India - Employee of a statutory corporation is entitled to claim against Corporation - Claim for Damages - Claim Protection of Articles 14 and 16 - Order for removal from service - Whether an order for removal from service contrary to regulations, would enable employees to a declaration against statutory corporation of continuance in service or would only give rise to a claim for damages - Second, whether an employee of a statutory corporation is entitled to claim protection of Articles 14 and 16 against Corporation - Composition of Commission is Chairman, and not less than two, and not more than eight, other members appointed by Central Government - One of members shall be a whole-time Finance Member in charge of financial matters relating to Commission - Central Government may, if it thinks fit, appoint one of members as Vice-Chairman of Commission - Under Section 12 of 1959 Act Commission may, for purpose of performing its functions or exercising. its powers, appoint such number of employees as it may consider necessary - Functions and terms and conditions of service of such employees shall be such as may be provided by regulations made under 1959 Act - There was an existing organisation set up in pursuance of a resolution of Government of India - Every person employed by said existing organization before the establishment of Commission became an employee of Corporation in accordance with the provisions contained in Section13 of the 1959 Act – Held, Court held that a breach had been committed by the appellant of regulation 16 (3), but such an order made in breach of the regulations would only be contrary to the terms and conditions of relationship between the appellant and the respondent and it would not be in breach of any statutory obligation because the Act does not guarantee any statutory status to the respondent, nor does it impose any obligation on appellant in such matters - It does not establish that labour in public service to corporations owned by Government should be treated like Government servants engaged in administering or enforcing functions and duties connected with governmental functions - I would hold that Oil & Natural Gas Commission, Life Insurance Corporation and Industrial Finance Corporation are not authorities within meaning of Article 12 of Constitution and regulations framed by them have no force of law - Employees of these statutory bodies have no statutory status and they are not entitled to declaration of being in employment when their dismissal or removal is in contravention of statutory provisions - Appeals are disposed of.
Judgment
A. N. RAY, C. J.: (For himself and on behalf of Y. V. Chandrachud and A.C. Gupta, JJ.):- There are two questions for consideration in these appeals. First, whether an order for removal from service contrary to regulations, framed under the Oil and Natural Gas Commission Act, 1959; the Industrial Finance Corporation Act, 1948; and the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 would enable the employees to a declaration against the statutory corporation of continuance in service or would only give rise to a claim for damages. Second, whether an employee of a statutory corporation is entitled to claim protection of Articles 14 and 16 against the Corporation. In short the question is whether these statutory corporations are authorities within the meaning of Article 12.
2. The statutes for consideration are the Oil and Natural Gas Commission Act, 1959; the Industrial Finance Corporation Act, 1948; and the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956. The question which really falls for decision is whether regulations framed under these statutes have the force of law.
3. The Oil and Natural Gas Commission Act, 1959 hereinafter referred to as the 1959 Act established the Commission as a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal. The composition of the Commission is the Chairman, and not less than two, and not more than eight, other members appointed by the Central Government. One of the members shall be a whole-time Finance Member in charge of the financial matters relating to the Commission. The Central Government may, if it thinks fit, appoint one of the members as Vice-Chairman of the Commission. Under Section 12 of the 1959 Act the Commission may, for the purpose of performing its functions or exercising. its powers, appoint such number of employees as it may consider necessary. The functions and the terms and conditions of service of such employees shall be such as may be provided by regulations made under the 1959 Act. There was an existing organisation set up in pursuance of a resolution of the Government of India No. 22/29/55-C & G dated 14 August 1956. Every person employed by the said existing organisation before the establishment of the Commission became an employee of the Corporation in accordance with the provisions contained in Section13 of the 1959 Act.
4. Sections 31 and 32 of the 1959 Act are important. Section 31 states that the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules to give effect to the provisions of the Act. The rules provide inter alia for the term of office of, and the manner of filling casual vacancies among the members, and their conditions of service; the disqualifications for membership of the Commission and the procedure to be followed in removing a member who is or becomes subject to any disqualification; the procedure to be followed in the discharge of functions by members; the conditions subject to which and the mode in which contracts may be entered into by or on behalf of the Commission and some other matters. Every rule made under Section 31 of the 1959 Act shall be laid as soon as may be before each House of Parliament as mentioned in the Section. Both Houses may agree to or annul the rule or modify it.
5. Under Section 32 of the 1959 Act the Commission may, with the previous approval of the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, make regulations not inconsistent with the Act and the rules made thereunder, for enabling it to discharge its functions under the Act. The regulations provide inter alia for the terms and conditions of appointment and service and the scales of pay of employees of the Commission; the time and place of meetings of the Commission, the procedure to be followed in regard to the transaction of business at such meetings; the maintenance of minutes of meetings of the Commission and the transmission of copies thereof to the Central Government; the persons by whom, and the manner in which payments, deposits and in
referred to : Co-op. Bank v. Industrial tribunal
Co-op.. Bank v. Indust. tribunal
Rajasthan State Electricity Beard v. Mchan Lal
distinguished : K. S. Ramamurthi v. Chief Commr.
Hindustan Antibiorics v., Workmen
Mafatlal Naraindas Barot v. Divisional Controller S.T.C.
relied on : Praga Tools Corpn. v. lmanual
relied on : G. J. Fernandez v. State of Mysore
Gurushantappa v. Abdul Khaddus
Overruled : U.P. Warehousing Corpn. v. Tyagi
explained : U. P. Warehousing Corpn. v. C. K. Tyagi
Overruled : I. A. v. Sukhdeo Rai
Sirsi Municipality v. Cecelia Kom Francis
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.