TMI Blog1971 (4) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lations made by the Corporation under Section 45 of the Act, and that therefore, the dismissal was illegal and void. The Trial Court accepted the contention and granted a declaration that his service continued as the order dismissing him was null and void. That decree was upheld by the first appellate court. In a second appeal in the High Court, it was conceded that the Regulations applied to the respondent's case, and that the procedure therein laid down for terminating his service was not complied with. The Corporation's contention, however, was that the only relief to which the respondent was entitled to was damages and that a declaration, such as the one granted by the Trial Court, could not be given. The High Court rejected that contention holding that the Corporation was under a statutory obligation to observe the procedure laid down in the Regulations, and that that not having been done, the order of dismissal was illegal and void, and the respondent continued to be in the employment of the Corporation as if there was no termination of service. This appeal, founded on a certificate granted by the High Court, is directed against its aforesaid judgment and decree. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith such an obligation. The decision in Vine v. National Dock Labour Board [1957] A.C. 488 illustrates a case where the court would grant a declaration of nullity. That was a case of lack of power in the Board to delegate its disciplinary function to a committee which dismissed the employee-an action which was held ultra vires, and therefore, a nullity. A similar consequence also follows where the appointment is to an office or status, such as the vice-chancellorship of a university, as was the case in Bool Chand v. The Chancellor (1968)IILLJ135SC , where this Court held that the tenure of office held by the appellant could not be terminated without informing him of the allegations made against him and without hearing him or giving him an opportunity to give an explanation. 6. There is, on the other hand, the case of Vidyodava University v. Silva [1964] 3 All E.R. 865 where a teacher appointed by the University was found not to be holding such an office or status and where it was held that the University, though established under a statute, was under no statutory obligation or restriction, subject to which only it could terminate the service of the teacher. The service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be prescribed in this behalf may also appoint such number of officers and employees as it may think necessary. Its second sub-section provides that: Subject to the provisions of Section 20, every person employed by each of the Corporations shall be subject to such conditions of service and shall be entitled to such remuneration and privileges as may be determined by regulations made by the Corporation by which he is employed. Section 20 provides that: Every officer or other employee of an existing air company-employed by that company prior to the first day of July, 1952, and still in its employment immediately before the appointed date shall-become as from the appointed date an officer or other employee, as the case may be, of the Corporation in which the undertaking has vested and shall hold his office or service therein by the same tenure, at the same remuneration and upon the same terms and conditions and with the same rights and privileges as to pensions and gratuity and other matters as he would have held the same under the existing air company if its undertaking had not vested in the Corporation and shall continue to do so unless and un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f law its employees had in their respective existing companies, and which, until such alteration, were ensured to them. Indeed, the power of the Corporation to terminate the employment of its officers and other employees was no where disputed; the only dispute raised was as to the manner in which it could be exercised. It is necessary to observe in this connection that neither the Act nor the rules made under Section 44 by the Central Government lay down any obligation or restriction as to the power of the Corporation to terminate the employment of its employees or any procedural safeguards, subject to which only, such power could be exercised. The reason is that under the scheme of the Act such procedural safeguards and other terms and conditions of service were to be provided for in the regulations made by the Corporation under Section 45. 9. The employment of the respondent not being one to an office or status and there being no obligation or restriction in the Act or the rules subject to which only the power to terminate the respondent's employment could be exercised, could the respondent contend that he was entitled to a declaration that the termination of his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of master and servant and not subject to any statutory obligation although the Corporation had framed under its power under the Act regulations containing conditions of service in the Corporation. A similar view has recently been taken by the High Court of Calcutta in Life Insurance Corporation N. Banerjee [1971] 1 L.L.J. 1. 11. Counsel for the respondent, however, sought assistance from the decision in the Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Mukherjee (1964)ILLJ442SC . That decision is clearly distinguishable and can, therefore, give no assistance. Prior to the passing of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 the respondent there was an employee of one of the insurance companies taken over under the Act. Under his contract of employment, his service was liable to be terminated without notice if he was found guilty of fraud, misappropriation etc. but was entitled to 30 days' notice if it was terminated for any other reason. His service was terminated admittedly without giving him an opportunity to be heard. With the transfer of the controlled business from the insurer to the Corporation, the employees of the former became the employees of the latter and were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Order of the Government, and consequently, the order terminating the service of an officer would have to be in consonance with the provisions of the said Order. Consequently, an order terminating the service of an officer without giving him an opportunity of being heard, as provided by Clause (10) of the said Order, would be without power, and therefore, invalid. The Court held the impugned dismissal as invalid also for the reason that Regulation 4(3) provided for determination of pay and allowances and the fitment of officers in accordance with the principle laid down in the said circulars, and therefore, the service of an officer could not be determined under the guise of fitment. That could, therefore, be done only under Clause (10) of the Order and in accordance with the procedure laid down in that clause. The order declaring the dismissal invalid thus was based on the ground that the regulations and the Order of the Central Government must be read harmoniously and when so read, the Central Government's Order gave power to terminate the service of an officer after following the procedure there laid down, and consequently, the impugned dismissal made inconsistently with t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delegates its own power to make them. In Rajasthan State Electricity Board Mohan Lal (1968)ILLJ257SC where this Court held the Board, set up under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 54 of 1948, as a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution against which mandamus could issue under Article 226, emphasised the fact that the Act contained provisions which empowered the Board to issue directions, the disobedience of which was punishable as a penal offence. As observed earlier, under Sections 8(2) and 20, the appellant-Corporation has been given the power to employ its own officers and other employees to the extent it thinks necessary on terms and conditions provided by it in regulations made under Section 45. The regulations contain the terms and conditions which govern the relationship between the Corporation and its employees. Though made under the power conferred by the statute, they merely embody the terms and conditions of service in the Corporation but do not constitute a statutory restriction as to the kind of contracts which the Corporation can make with its servants or the grounds on which it can terminate them. That being so, and the Corporation haying undoubtedly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
