Statutory body Agra University Hand Book ,1965-1966,, Statute 14-A Before an institution can be a statutory body it must be created by or under the statute and owe its existence to a statute. This must be the primary thing which has got to be established. Here a distinction must be made between an institution which is not created by or under a statute but is governed by certain statutory provisions for the proper maintenance and administration of the institution. There have been a number of institutions which though not created by or under any statute have adopted certain statutory provisions, but that by itself is not, in our opinion, sufficient to clothe the institution with a statutory character. In Sukhdev Singh v, Bhagatram Sardar Singh Raghuvanshi, AIR 1975 SC 1331 at p. 1339 this Court clearly pointed out as to what constitutes a statutory body. In this connection my Lord A.N. Ray, C.J., observed as follows : "A company incorporated under the Companies Act is not created by the Companies Act but comes into existence in accordance with the provisions of the Act. It is not a statutory body because it is not created by the statute. It is a body created in accordance with the provisions of the statute." It is, therefore, clear that there is a well marked distinction between a body which is created by the statute and a body which after having come into existence is governed in accordance with the provisions of the statute. In other words the position seems to be that the institution concer5ned must owe its very existence to a statute which would be the fountainhead of its powers. The question in such cases to be asked is, if there is no statute, would the institution have any legal existence. If the answer is in the negative, then undoubtedly it is a statutory body, but if the institution has a separate existence of its own without any reference to the statute concerned but is merely governed by the statutory provisions it cannot be said to be a statutory body. Similarly the mere fact that the statues of the University were adopted by the Managing Committee and it was as a matter of convention bound to follow the statutory provisions of the Act would not clothe the Managing Committee with a statutory status or character. In fact the adoption of the statutes was agreed to by the appellant Executive Committee for the better governance, administration and extension of the educational activities of the institution. In fact an identical argument which forms the basis of the judgment of the Full Bench of the High Court had been advanced before this Court and rejected outright. For instance in Sabhajit Tewary v. Union of India, AIR 1975 SC 1329, 1330 the question was whether the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research which was a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, as the present appellant is, was a statutory body. It was urged that because the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research had Government nominees as the President of the body and derived guidance and financial aid from the Government, it was statutory body. A.N. Ray, C.J., rebutted these arguments and observed as follows : "The Society does not have a statutory character like the Oil and Natural Gas Commission, or the Life Insurance Corporation or Industrial Finance Corporation. It is a society incorporated in accordance with the provisions of the Societies Registration Act. The fact that the Prime Minister is the President or that the Government appoints nominees to the Governing Body or that the Government may terminate the membership will not establish anything more than the fact that the Government takes special care that the promotion, guidance and co-operation of scientific and industrial research, the institution and financing of specific researches, establishment or development and assistance to special institutions or departments of the existing institutions for scientific study or problem affecting particular industry in a trade, the utilization of the result of the researches conducted under the auspices of the Council towards the development of industries in the country are carried out in a responsible manner." Similar view was taken by this Court in Kumari Regina v. St. Aloysius Higher Elementary School, AIR 1971 SC 1920 at p. 1924 (Vaish Degree College v. Lakshmi Narain, AIR 1976 SC 888 (893,894)