IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
J. K. Tandon and R. A. Misra, JJ.
KEDAR NATH SETHI - Appellant
Versus
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA - Respondents
Writ Petn. 238 Of 1959
Decided On : 03/28/1960
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION ACT - SECTION 11, 18, 22, 48, 49 - STAFF REGULATIONS, 1956 - REGULATION 9, 41 - SUSPENSION OF EMPLOYEE - POWER OF ZONAL MANAGER - VALIDITY OF STAFF REGULATIONS - APPLICABILITY TO TRANSFERRED EMPLOYEES - INTERPRETATION OF STATUTORY PROVISIONS.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an employee of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC), was suspended by the Zonal Manager for alleged misappropriation of funds. The petitioner challenged the suspension order on the grounds that the Zonal Manager lacked the authority to suspend him and that the Staff Regulations, 1956, which authorized the suspension, were invalid.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Zonal Manager had the authority to suspend the petitioner under Section 22 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956, which entrusted the superintendence and direction of the zonal office to the Zonal Manager. The court also held that the Staff Regulations, 1956, were valid and applicable to the petitioner, a transferred employee, as they were made under the authority of Section 49(1) of the Act, which empowered the Corporation to make regulations for all matters necessary to give effect to the provisions of the Act.
Issues: 1. Whether the Zonal Manager had the authority to suspend the petitioner. 2. Whether the Staff Regulations, 1956, were valid and applicable to the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 22 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956, empowered the Zonal Manager with the superintendence and direction of the zonal office, which included the power to take action against employees who acted in a manner detrimental to the affairs and business of the zonal office. 2. Section 49(1) of the Act empowered the Corporation to make regulations for all matters necessary to give effect to the provisions of the Act. The Staff Regulations, 1956, were made under this authority and were therefore valid. The regulations were also applicable to the petitioner, a transferred employee, as they were made for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of the Act.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, holding that the suspension order was valid and that the Staff Regulations, 1956, were valid and applicable to the petitioner.
( 1 ) THE petitioner Sri Kedar Nath Sethi is an employee of the Life Insurance Corporation of India since its inception. The history which preceded the constitution of the Corporation in so far as it is relevant, here is that there used to be a number of insurance companies in the country which carried on life insurance business. This business which has been called as controlled business was as a result of the nationalisation transferred and vested in the Corporation. The employees of these erstwhile companies were also transferred in the process under the employment of the corporation.
( 2 ) SECTION 11 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act which made provision for the transfer of the services of such employees laid down that every whole-time employee of an insurer,. e. an erstwhile insurance company whose controlled business had been transferred to and vested in the corporation and who was employed by the insurer wholly or mainly in connection with his controlled business immediately before the appointed day,. e. , the 1st September, 1956, shall, on and from that day become an employee of the Corporation. The section further laid down that such employee shall hold his office in the Corporation by the same tenure, at the same remuneration and upon the same terms and conditions and with the same rights and privileges as to pension and gratuity and other matters- as he would have held the same on the appointed day if the said Act had not been passed and further that he shall continue to do so unless and until his employment in the Corporation is terminated or until his remuneration, terms and conditions are duly altered by the Corporation.
( 3 ) IN pursuance of the above provision Sri Sethi became an employee of the Corporation. It is material to point out just now that according to the terms and conditions applicable to him his salary was below Rs. 500/ -. This will be relevant in considering the applicability of certain regulations which in due course were promulgated by the corporation governing the conditions of service etc. of the staff working under it.
( 4 ) SRI Sethi held the post of Inspector and as such belonged, to the field staff. In the performance of his duty he had to take work from agents and also received premia from policy holders etc. towards policies held or proposed by them. It is alleged that Sri Sethi in the performance of his said duty deceived two items of Rs. 45. 86 np. from one Dr. Kapoor whose life policy had lapsed on account of non-payment but instead of paying the said amounts into the Corporation he retained them and deposited the same in his personal account. A relative charge-sheet accusing him of misappropriating these amounts was therefore delivered to him on the 15th of July, 1959. A second charge-sheet accusing him of misappropriating four other items was also given to him on the 29th August 1959. The charge against him in brief was that he misappropriated those amounts, hence was guilty of misconduct and deserved to be punished.
( 5 ) THE above charge-sheets were given to him by the Zonal Manager Sri T. S. Swaminathan who further suspended him till the completion of the inquiry against him. The inquiry was then entrusted to Sri C. N. Sharma, an officer of the Corporation, who is respondent no. 2.
( 6 ) IT is not necessary for us to state here all these facts which have been alleged in the case by the two parties since they have come to an agreement before us wherefore the petitioner will be allowed by the present Zonal Manager a reasonable opportunity to show cause on the charges delivered to him including an opportunity to adduce such further evidence or to cross-examine any witnesses already examined as he should consider necessary before the final action is decided against him. In view of this agreement it is no longer necessary for us to consider that part of the case which concerns the inquiry by Sri C. N. Sharma and the competence of that officer to hold the same. The
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.