TMI Blog1963 (10) TMI 46X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. Pleader Amicus Curiae: Adv. General JUDGMENT N. Anantanarayanan, J. 1. The civil misc. appeal really involves the brief question whether R. 17 framed by the Government under the Employees' State Insurance Act of 1948, (The Madras Employees' Insurance Court Rules, 1951) is intra vires of the delegated cowers of the State, or otherwise. The matter has come up on difference ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ules for the purposes of the Act. 3. The point is really quite simple, and may be precisely expressed in the following form. Where an Act itself does not provide for limitation, with reference to a particular matter and the delegation of power to make rules is conferred by a section of the Act which does not, expressly or impliedly, relate to the power to prescribe time, the authority to which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, all the particulars of which need not be reproduced here, which definitely proves that, where the rule-making power is conferred by a section of the Act. and it is contemplated that the rule-making authority might also prescribe limitation, there is a specific reference to the power to prescribe time, in some form or another, in the section concerned. It is sufficient for us to point out that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Corporation in this case, is primarily that of the employer. Actually, the default in this respect might be brought to the notice of the Corporation only if an individual case arose, and if there is to be a strict rule of limitation! in this behalf, as. envisaged by R. 17, the result may constitute very great hardship to the employees and their organisation, and deprivation of the benefits. Again, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
