TMI Blog1961 (2) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iery belongs, and belonged at the relevant date to a private company, viz., M/s. Central Bhowra Colliery Co., Private Limited. The appellant is and was a shareholder and a director of this company. After the Sub- Divisional Officer took cognizance of the complaint and issued processes against him, the appellant made an application to the Patna High Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution, for the issue of an appropriate writ for quashing the criminal proceedings. This application was summarily dismissed. It if; against that order of dismissal that this appeal has been filed by special leave obtained from this Court. The two main grounds on which the prayer for quashing the proceedings was based were: (1) that s. 76 of the Mines Act, 1952, in pursuance of which the appellant, who was not himself the owner of the colliery company, but only one of the directors and shareholders has been prosecuted, is void as it violates Art. 14 of the Constitution; (2) the Coal Mines Regulations, 1957, are invalid having been framed in contravention of a. 59(3) of the Mines Act, 1952. These two contentions were also urged before us in appeal. The first contention is based on an assumption that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, and the regulation shall not be so published until each such Board has had a reasonable opportunity, of reporting as to the expediency of making the same and as to the suitability of its provisions. A similar provision was made in the fourth sub-section as regards the making of rules. By an amendment made in 1959 these two subsections have been combined into one. It was not disputed before us that when the Regulations were framed, no Board as required under s. 12 had been constituted, and so, necessarily there had been no reference to any Board as required under s. 59. The question raised is whether the omission to make such a reference make the rules invalid. As has been recognised again and again by the courts, no general rule can be laid down for deciding whether any particular provision in a statute is mandatory, meaning thereby that non-observance thereof involves the consequence of invalidity or only directory, i.e., a direction the non-observance of which does not entail the consequence of invalidity, whatever other consequences may occur. But in each case the court has to decide the legislative intent. Did the legislature intend in making the statutory provisions th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s; (k) for providing for the safety of the persons employed in a mine; (m) for providing for the safety of the roads and working places in mines; (n) for the inspection of workings and sealed off fire areas in a mine; (o) far providing for the ventilation of mines; (r) for providing for proper lighting of mines and regulating the use of safety amps therein;-are sufficient to show that the very purpose of the Act may well be defeated unless suitable and practical regulations are framed to help the achievement of this purpose, Arbitrary and haphazard regulations without full consideration of their practicability and ultimate effect on the efficient working of the mines, would, apart from, often defeating the purpose of the Act, affect injuriously the general economy of the country. That we are entitled to presume, is the reason behind the legislature's anxiety that Mining Boards should have an opportunity of examining regulations, and expressing their opinion before they are finalised. As has been already mentioned s. 12 which deals with the formation of boards provides for representation thereupon of two persons nominated by owners of mines or their representatives and two ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing clause (1) of s. 57 may be made without previous publication and without previous reference to Mining Boards, if the Central Government is satisfied that for the prevention of apprehended danger or the speedy remedy of conditions likely to cause danger it is necessary in making such regulations to dispense with the delay that would result from such publication and reference . Thus, the apprehended danger to public interest from requiring as a condition of the validity of regulations previous consultation with the Mining Board is averted. An examination of all the relevant circumstances, viz., the language used, the scheme of the legislation, the benefit to the public on insisting on strict compliance as well as the risks to public interest on insistence on such compliance leads us to the conclusion that the legislative intent was to insist on these provisions for consultation with the Mining Board as a prerequisite for the validity of the regulations. This conclusion is strengthened by the fact that in s. 60 when providing for the framing of regulations in certain cases without following the procedure enjoined in s. 59, the legislature took care to add by a proviso that a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... life. In Srivastava's Case ([1958] S.C.R. 533.) this Court quoted with approval the following observations of the Privy Council in Montreal Sirgeet Railway Company v. Nor. mandin ([1917] A.C. 170, 175.):- When the provisions of a statute relate to the performance of a public duty and the case is such that to hold null and void acts done in neglect of this duty would work serious general inconvenience, or injustice to persons who have no control over those entrusted with the duty, and at the same time would not promote the main object of the Legislature, it has been the practice to hold such provisions to be directory only, the neglect of them, though punishable, not affecting the validity of the acts done. and applied the principle thus laid down to the case before it. There is however no scope in the present case of applying this principle in support of the directory nature of s. 59(3). As we have pointed out above, the inconvenience that might be caused by holding regulations made in contravention of s. 59(3) invalid is removed by the provisions of s. 60; and on the other hand to hold that regulations may be validly made without following the procedure laid dow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
