The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of compliance with statutory provisions and the limited scope of seeking relief through writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.

1. The petitioner is a trade union registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926 with registration No.1107/TRY. The claim of the petitioner was that they are functioning in the second respondent Company. In the second respondent company, more than 51% of the shares are held by the Government of Tamil Nadu. It is a Government company within the meaning of Section 617 of the Companies Act.

2. It is the claim of the petitioner union that they along with various other unions were constantly requesting for a holiday to be declared for their factory at Pugalur on account of the birth anniversary of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, which was celebrated by both State and Central Governments. The State Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.911, Public Department, dated 20.10.2011 declaring 14.04.2012 as a public holiday on account of the birth anniversary of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. The Central Government through the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel & Training vide their Office memorandum dated 21.3.2011 had also declared 14.04.2011 as a closed holiday for all Central Government offices including Industrial Establishments throughout India. Notwithstanding the same, by not declaring a public holiday on 14.04.2012 as well as for all these years, the second respondent is showing disrespect to the sentiments of the people. Therefore, the petitioner union sent a representation on 03.04.2012 just 10 days before the birth anniversary of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar requesting the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu to declare 14.04.2012 as a national holiday including the factory run by the second respondent at Kagithapuram, Karur District. Thereafter, they filed the present writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondent to celebrate the birth anniversary of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar falling on 14.04.2012 and in subsequent years by providing holiday to all employees and workers of the second respondent company in terms of the G.O.Ms.No.911, Public (Misc) Department, dated 20.10.2011 under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Subsequently, they filed M.P.No.1 of 2011 amending the prayer seeking for a direction to the respondent to provide a public holiday to all employees and workers in the TNPL on the birth anniversary of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar falling on 14th April every year in accordance with the annual list of public holidays notified every year by both the Central Government and the Government of Tamil Nadu under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

3. When the writ petition came up for admission on 12.04.2012, this court directed the learned Government Advocate to get instructions from the respondents. Mr. S. Muthuraj, learned Standing Counsel for the second respondent company, on taking notice in the writ petition, has filed a counter affidavit dated 21.12.2012 sworn to by the Officer-HR (Legal) working in the second respondent company. It has to be seen whether the petitioner union has made out a case for granting the relief sought in the writ petition.

4. The first contention that the second respondent company is a Government company within the meaning of Section 617 of the Companies Act is squarely denied by the respondents. In paragraph 12 of the counter affidavit, it was averred as follows :

"12...The averment made in para 3 that TNPL is a Government Company in which more than 51% share is held by various government undertakings both central and state and the Government of Tamil Nadu itself which qualifies it as a Government Company as per Sec.617 of the Companies Act, 1956 is denied as false. It is submitted that it is incorrect to state that the Respondent is a Government Company as per Sec.617 of the Companies Act, 1956. Further it is submitted that presently, the Government of Tamil Nadu is holding only 35.32% of the total equity capital of the Respondent company and the remaining 64.68% of the equity is held by Indian Financial Institutions, Insurance Companies, Indian Public, Non-Resident Indians, Overseas Corporate