SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Guj) 136

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :H.R.Shelat
CHANDRAKANT MULJIBHAI PARIKH - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
S.C.A. 1108 of 1992
Decided On : 02/27/2001

Advocates Appeared: A.D.OZA, HARM P.RAVAL

Headnote:Constitution of India, 1950 - Art. 226 - Writ - High Court to direct executive to frame rules - Scope of - Interference - Gujarat Legislative Assembly Member Pension Act, 1984 (effective from 15.8.1989) - Secs. 3, 4 and 5 - Application under Sec. 3 for grant of pension filed - Government framed no rules in matter - Prayer to direct State to make rules and also direction to grant pension - Delegation of power - Failure on part of Government to frame rules - Exercise of extra-ordinary power - Principle of separation of power - Court interfered in matter - Issued necessary directions.

       In the case on hand, issuing the Notification on 8th August, 1989 the Act is brought into force from 15th August, 1989. Vide Sec. 5, Legislature has assigned the function of framing of the Rules to the Executive, and till today though more than 11 years have passed, Rules are not framed. No reason is assigned as to why the Rules are not framed. It seems that under the guise of `no Rules, the Government wants to avoid the payment of pension, defy the mandate of the Legislature and impair the right acquired by the Ex-MLAs. When this is the case and the whole object of the Act is being pooh-poohed amounting to disregard to the mandate of the Legislature, the Court cannot afford to sit in the ivory tower of isolation. In that case, it would be just to give necessary direction to the Government to frame the Rules. On another Court also such direction can be given. As stated above, the Executive has to carry out the mandate of the Legislature expressed through the Statutes and Acts and if that mandate is disregarded or ignored, harmony amongst the three organs of the Government would be shattered and that would be nothing but a fall of the democratic system and the rule of law we have adopted.

       [Para 16]

       The application is, accordingly, allowed. The opponent is directed to decide the petitioners application within the period of three months from today keeping Sec. 3 read with Sec. 4 of the Act in mind and shall not abstain from deciding on the ground that the Rules are not framed. The opponent is further directed to frame the Rules under Sec. 5 of the Act within the period of 10 months from today undergoing required formalities.

       [Para 18]

H. R. SHELAT, J.

( 1 ). AGAINST the inaction of the Government of Gujarat in framing the Rules qua the pension for the Members of the Gujarat Legislative assembly, petitioner the Ex-M. L. A. by filing this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks appropriate writ directing the Government to frame the Rules, publish the same and decide his application in that regard passing appropriate order etc.

( 2 ). The matrix of the facts first be stated. The petitioner was elected as the Member of the Gujarat Legislative Assembly from Baroda City Constituency in the year 1967 and served as Member of the Assembly for the full term of 5 years. He was again elected when elections were held in 1972 and served as a Member of the Assembly for the full term of 5 years. The Gujarat legislative Assembly passed an Act known as "the Gujarat Legislative assembly Members Pension Act, 1984 (for short, "the Act" ). It was to come into force on such day the Government of Gujarat might by notification in official gazette appoint. The State Government then decided to bring the Act into force in 1989. The assent of His Excellency, the Governor of Gujarat was obtained on 20th February, 1986. The Government then decided to bring the Act into force from 15th August, 1989. The Act was then published in the Government Extra-ordinary Gazette dated 8th August, 1989, and the same has been brought into force from 15th August, 1989. As per Sec. 3 of the act, the petitioner was entitled to the pension at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month and also the additional pension as per the Proviso to Sec. 3 of the act. The petitioner then applied for the pension, but his application is yet kept pending and no final order awarding the pension is passed on the ground that rules which are required to be framed under Sec. 5 of the Act are not framed. The petitioner was disgustedly shocked knowing such fact that though the Act was passed in 1984 and was brought into force from August 15, 1989 the rules under Sec. 5 were even not framed till 1992. By a letter dated 17th november, 1990 he was informed that the question of payment of pension to the Ex-M. L. As. was under active consideration. He could see that it was a trite-letter. Because of the inaction on the part of the Executive in framing the Rules the petitioner could see that the legal right to have the pension which he acquired under the Act was being impaired and denied. It was the bounden duty of the Executive to carry out the mandate of the Legislature and frame the Rules within reasonable time. It cannot put off the work of framing of the Rules to unreasonable length of time at its pleasure and sweet-will or under any pretext. At present, the petitioner is aged 65 years and if the Government is not framing the Rules and goes on delaying in the gruesome manner or shrewdly, at present it has been doing, he fears that he would not be able to get the pension during his lifetime. His legitimate right cannot be denied by the Government on the ground that the Rules are not framed. The Gujarat ex-M. L. A. Council has been formed by the former M. L. As. and several members of that Council have also sending the applications prayed for the pension. The Government has no right to defeat the right the Ex-M. L. As. have acquired under the Act to get the pension. Regardless of the framing of the rules, he is entitled to pension as the requirements of Sec. 3 of the Act are satisfied in his case. The State Government has therefore no justifiable reason to deny the payment of pension on any ground or on the ground that the rules are not framed. Despite considerable attempts, when the Government has denied to make the payment of the pension, the petitioner is constrained to file this application for a direction to the Government of Gujarat to frame the rules and publish the same under Sec. 5 of the Act, take just decision on his application for pension pending at present within the time granted and make the payment of the pe




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top