MOHD.SHAMIM, S.B.WAD
P. B. GHAYALOD – Appellant
Versus
MARUTI UDYOG LIMITED – Respondent
( 1 ) THE petitioner through the present writ petition wants this court to quash the termination order dated 14-9-1990 whereby his services were terminated by the respondents.
( 2 ) THE submissions of the petitioner are that Maruti Udyog Ltd. , Respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as respondent) is a Government company as defined in Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. It was incorporated on 24th November, 1981 and became a "deemed public company" under section 43-A (i) of the Companies Act, 1956 w. e. f. 24th January, 1983. The Joint Venture agreement and the license agreement were signed with Suzuki Motor Company on 2-10-1982. The equity participation in between Government of India (hereinafter referred to as respondent No. 2 for the sake of brevity) and the Suzuki Motor Company is in the ratio of 60 : 40. Respondent No. 1 is completely under the control of respondent No. 2 under the Ministry of Industry which is managed by a Chairman, under the superintendence and control of Board of Directors who are appointed by the Central Government and are removeable by it. It is this veil behind which the Central Government operates through the instrumentality of the re
REFERRED TO : Ajay Hasia etc. v. Khalid Mujib Sehravandi and others etc.
R. D. Shetty v. The International Airport Authority of India
K. M. Thomas, Petitioner v. Cochin Refiaeries Ltd. and others, Respondents
Ashok Kumar Mital, petitioner v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. and another, Respondents
State of U.P. and Anr. v. M/s. Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. and Anr.
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.