High Court of Calcutta
Bhagabati Prasad Banerjee, A.K. Bhattacharjee, JJ.
Director Indian Association For The Cultivation Of Science Jadavpur – Appellant
Versus
Ashoke Kumar Roy – Respondent
Tender No. 2331 of 1990
Decided On : Feb 21, 1992
WRIT PETITION - MAINTAINABILITY - INDIAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE CULTIVATION OF SCIENCE, JADAVPUR - AUTHORITY UNDER ARTICLES 12 AND 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - HELD: NOT AN AUTHORITY - WRIT NOT MAINTAINABLE.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioner, a laboratory technician, was appointed on a temporary basis for one year under a project sponsored by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR). His service was extended under various projects. He filed a writ petition seeking a declaration that he was an employee of the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science (IACS) and praying for absorption as a regular staff, fixation of pay scale, and disbursement of arrears. The trial court allowed the writ petition and directed IACS to absorb the petitioner as a regular staff within three months.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court found that the IACS was not an 'authority' within the meaning of Articles 12 and 226 of the Constitution of India. The court held that the IACS was an autonomous body registered under the Societies Registration Act, and it was not controlled by the government in any manner whatsoever. The court further held that the petitioner's service was purely contractual and outside the domain of public law.
Issues: 1. Whether the IACS is an 'authority' within the meaning of Articles 12 and 226 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether a writ petition is maintainable against the IACS?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the IACS was not an 'authority' within the meaning of Articles 12 and 226 of the Constitution of India because: * It was an autonomous body registered under the Societies Registration Act. * It was not controlled by the government in any manner whatsoever. * The petitioner's service was purely contractual and outside the domain of public law. 2. The court held that a writ petition was not maintainable against the IACS because: * The IACS was not an 'authority' within the meaning of Articles 12 and 226 of the Constitution of India. * The petitioner's service was purely contractual and outside the domain of public law.
Final Decision: The High Court allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the trial court. The court held that the IACS was not an 'authority' within the meaning of Articles 12 and 226 of the Constitution of India and that a writ petition was not maintainable against the IACS.
1. THIS is an appeal against the judgment dated 20th July, 1990 passed by the learned Trial Judge in Civil rule No. 13063 (W) of 1986. The respondent writ petitioners filed a Writ application praying for a Mandamus upon the appellants herein to act and proceed in accordance with the provisions of law and to cancel, withdraw and / or rescind the order contained in annexure 'd' of the writ petition by which the petitioner was informed that Prof. A. N. Chakraborty, Head, Department of medical Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Calcutta has stated that Sri Roy may be advised to approach the ICMR through his last Controlling officer at IACS through the Offices of IACS (Registrar etc) giving clear written indications of his acceptance of his retrenchment with effect from 30-9-85. The writ petitioner respondent was appointed to the post of Laboratory Technician attached to the Department of Macromolecules under the ICMR Project entitled "natural Transfer of Plastics with special Booties as Food Additives" on a temporary basis on Rs.500/- (Fixed) per month for a period of one year initially. The said appointment was to be terminated upon withdrawal/ termination of the scheme by the Sponsoring authority at any time of upon non- renewal of his services due to unsatisfactory progress. Thereafter the service of the writ petitioner was extended under various projects. The Writ petitioner also prayed for an order to allow him to resume his duties and functions as usual in the post of Laboratory Technician and to fix and finalize his scale of pay and to draw and disburse the same including arrears there for and a declaration that the writ petitioner is an employee of the Indian association for the Cultivation of Science from December 6, 1978. The learned trial Judge on consideration of the matter allowed the writ application and made the Rule absolute and the learned trial Judge found that the writ petitioner was eligible for absorption as a regular staff of the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science against the post held by him and such absorption should be made within a period of three months from the date of communication of that order.
2. MR. Saktinath Mukherjee, learned Advocate appearing with Mr. Partha sarathi Sengupta, learned Advocate after arguing the case on merits for some time took a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the writ application relying upon a latest decision of the Supreme Court in the case of chander Mohan Khanna vs. The National Council of Educational Research and training and Ors. , reported in AIR 1992 SC 76. The said preliminary objection is whether the India Association for the Cultivation of Science is an authority either under Article 12 or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science is asociety registered under the Societies Registration Act XXI of 1860) 1860. The objects of the society are to (1) cultivate science in all its departments both with a view to its advancement by original research and to its varied applications to the arts and comforts of Life (2) found, equip and maintain scientific laboratories and library or reading room for general use among the members or the students of the Association (3) establish and maintain collections of Natural History, mechanical, Scientific and Philosophical inventions, instruments or designs, and (4) take all proper and necessary steps for diffusion and cultivation of science in all departments. There are four categories of members constituting the said Association, namely, (a) Ordinary members, (b) Life members, (c)Honorary fellows and (4) Ordinary fellows. Under the Articles of the Association the affairs of the said Association are administered, directed and controlled by an Executive Council. The said Council consists of 13 members out of which only four are Government nominees and representatives. Out of four, two members are nominated by the Ministry concerned
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.