IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL, JJ.
Devraj Sahu, S/o. Lt. Manik Lal Sahu & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Principal Secretary, Department of Health & Family Welfare & Medical Education & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (S) No. 1088 of 2022
Decided On : 31-07-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 14, 16, 39(b) – Chhattisgarh Chandulal Chandrakar Memorial Medical College, Durg (Acquisition) Act, 2021 – Section 12 – Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 25-FF – Bombay Municipal Corporation Act – Section 314 – Payment of exorbitant compensation – Fundamental right – Principles of natural justice – Constitutional validity – Held, Facts of present case, as in said case their Lordships were considering bar which stipulated that Municipal Commissioner can remove any structure on pavement without notice, and held that unreasonableness would vitiate law and procedure alike, which is not case here – In present case, jural relationship of master & servant as between respondent No.3 Company and petitioners still exists and therefore principles of law laid down in Olga Tellis (supra) would not apply to facts of present case – Writ petition dismissed.
ORDER :
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
1. The petitioners herein seek to challenge the constitutional validity of Section 12 of the Chhattisgarh Chandulal Chandrakar Memorial Medical College, Durg (Acquisition) Act, 2021 (for short, ‘the Act of 2021’) which came into force with effect from 3-9-2021.
2. The Chandulal Chandrakar Memorial Hospital Private Limited (CCMH Pvt. Ltd.) is a private company owned and operated by respondent No.3 herein and the said Company operates two establishments – the Chandulal Chandrakar Memorial Medical College & Hospital, Kachandur, Durg and the Chandulal Chandrakar Memorial Hospital at Motilal Nehru Nagar, Bhilai, District Durg. It is the claim of the petitioners that they were permanent employees of the said Medical College at Durg that has been acquired by the State Government. In July, 2021, the State Legislature has passed the Act of 2021 acquiring the assets, land, equipment, etc. of the Medical College at Kachandur, Durg by making payment of exorbitant compensation to the previous owners and the present petitioners and other workers were sought to be removed summarily by virtue of the provisions contained in Section 12 of the Act of 2021. It is also their case that no provision was made for paying them any retrenchment compensation nor was any notice served as required by law and it was held that the erstwhile management was to be responsible for the amounts due to the workers before the alleged acquisition. It was further pleaded that Section 12 of the Act of 2021 brought their services to an end. Sub-section (1) of Section 12 provides that none of the employees would have any claim for service under the new management of the Medical College. Similarly, sub-section (3) of Section 12 provides that they could claim any dues for services rendered in the past before the takeover from the erstwhile management i.e. respondent No.3 herein. There was no provision in the Act of 2021 to say that their services would be continued with the parent company. This shows that the Act had an awareness that the workers would have no claim to employment in CCMH Pvt. Ltd. after the acquisition of the Medical College at Kachandur, Durg, by the State Government. It is the further case of the petitioners that the State is obliged to act as model employer and prayer has been made to declare Section 12 of the Act of 2021 as ultra vires and further relief has been sought to direct the State Government to absorb the petitioners as employees in Chandulal Chandrakar Memorial Medical College, Kachandur, Durg with continuity of service. It has also been prayed that since Section 12 of the Act of 2021 has the effect of removing the workers from their jobs in an absolutely arbitrary manner, it be struck down as unconstitutional and ultra vires to the provisions of the Constitution of India.
3. Return to the writ petition has been filed by the State Government. It has been pleaded that the Act of 2021 is not ultra vires and there is always a presumption in favour of the constitutionality and an Act of Legislature will not be declared unconstitutional unless the case is so clear as to be free from doubt. It has further been pleaded that when the validity of a statute or the Act of Legislature is questioned and there are two interpretations, one of which would make the law valid and other void, the former must be preferred avoiding the other interpretation which makes the law void. In pronouncing on the constitutional validity of a statute, the court is not concerned with the wisdom or otherwise, the justice or injustice of the law. If the Act of Legislature, which is passed into law, is within the scope of the power conferred on a legislature and violates no restrictions on that power, the law must be upheld. It has also been pleaded that Chandulal Chandrakar Memorial Medical College was set up and started its operation in 2013 at Kachandur, Durg having 750 bed capacity in the medical college and the said hospital is having permission
Gurmail Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others
Olga Tellis and others v. Bombay Municipal Corporation and others
Charanjit Lal Choudhary v. The Union of India and others
Corporation of Calcutta v. Liberty Cinema
State of Gujarat v. R.A. Mehta
Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) (P) Ltd. v. Union of India
Binoy Viswam v. Union of India and others
The Workmen v. The Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and others
N.T.C. (South Maharashtra) Limited v. Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh and others
K.I. Shephard and others v. Union of India and others
Sundarjas Kanyalal Bhatija and others v. Collector, Thane, Maharashtra and others
Right to equality – Though a legislation affecting a single entity or a single undertaking or a single person would be permissible in law, it must be on the basis of reasonable classification having ....
The court upheld the State's invocation of emergency provisions under Section 52 of the Chhattisgarh Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973, finding it justified due to maladministration, and ruled that pri....
The State had the legislative power to enact Act 4 of 2010 and the acquisition did not violate the petitioners' constitutional rights.
Government cannot issue orders that violate service rules prohibiting strikes, which undermines public interest principles and regulatory frameworks.
The amendments to the Kerala Cashew Factories (Acquisition) Act, 1974 were declared unconstitutional for violating Article 14, as they discriminated against similarly situated factories and undermine....
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.