9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Company is a Private Company registered under the law. It is not a "State". 5.1 Once the above position is clear, the writ petitions would not lie against the respondent - Company. Learned Single Judge could not have, therefore, entertained the petitions on that ground alone. 5.2 Noticeably, learned Single Judge was aware of the said aspect that the respondent - Company did not have the status of the "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution. What was reasoned by the learned Single Judge to entertain the petitions notwithstanding the aforesaid aspect was that, since the financier had acted contrary to some interim order, the petitions merited entertainment. The Court does not endorse to the said view and to make the petitions maintainable on the said ground 5.3 The following was observed by learned Single Judge, "Since on this fact the financier has acted contrary to the interim order, the petition merited entertainment notwithstanding the fact that the respondent is a private financier and would not completely answer its status as being a State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India who performs public functions and loan is granted under the statutory requireme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their place. Such argument was opposed by the State, contending that the actions of the State or an instrumentality of the State, which do not properly belong to the field of public law but belong to the field of private law, were not subject to judicial review. Dealing with the said contentions, this Court observed:- "While we do find considerable force in the contention of the learned Attorney-General it may not be necessary for us to enter into any lengthy discussion of the topic, as we shall presently see. We also desire to warn ourselves against readily referring to English cases on questions of Constitutional law' Administrative Law and Public Law as the law in India in these branches has forced ahead of the law in England, guided as we are by our Constitution and uninhibited as we are by the technical rules which have hampered the development of the English law. While we do not for a moment doubt that every action of the State or an instrumentality of the State must be informed by reason and that, in appropriate cases actions uninformed by reason may be questioned as arbitrary in proceedings under Art.226 or Art.32 of the Constitution, we do not construe Art.14 as a chart ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : First, the persons or bodies who have legal authority to determine questions affecting the common law or statutory rights or obligations of other persons as individuals. That is the formula stated by Lord Justice Atkin in R. v. Electricity Commissioners, ex parte London Electricity Joint Committee Co., (1920) Ltd, (1924) 1 KB 171/205 as broadened by Lord Diplock in O'Reilly v. Mackman (1982) 3, WLR 1096/1104). Second, the persons or bodies who are entrusted by Parliament with functions, powers and duties which involve the making of decisions of a public nature....To which I would add the words of Lord Goddard, C.J. in R. v. National Joint Council for Dental Technicians, ex parte Neate (1953) 1 QB 704/707): "The bodies to which in modern times the remedies of these prerogative writs have been applied have all been statutory bodies on whom Parliament has conferred statutory powers and duties which, when exercised, may lead to the detriment of subjects who may have to submit to their jurisdiction". But those categories are not exhaustive. The courts can extend them to any other person or body of a public nature exercising public duties which it is desirable to control by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whether or not a public duty is involved. Prima facie, the same is true in relation to employment. The servant employed by a public body ordinarily has the same private rights as any other servant ". The position may, however, be different pointed out the learned Law Lord if such relationship is circumscribed by a statutory provision. 39. In this context, it would be appropriate to refer to two important English decisions, where a public duty was implied even in the absence of a statutory provisions. They are R. v. Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, ex parte Lain (1967) 2 All ER 770, and R. v. Panel on takeovers (1987) 1 All ER 564. In Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, the relevant facts are the following: In the year 1964 the Government of Great Britian announced a Scheme in both Houses of Parliament providing for compensation to victims of violence and persons injured while assisting the police. It was a non-statutory scheme under which compensation was to be paid ex gratia. The scheme was to be administered by a Board, who were to be provided with money through a grant-in-aid, out of which payment would be made when the Board was satisfied that the compensation was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Board are quite clearly under a duty to act judicially". The same idea was put forward by Diplock, L.J., in his separate opinion, where he said: "If new tribunals are established by acts of Government, the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court extends to them if they possess the essential characteristics on which the subjection of inferior tribunals to the supervisory control of the High Court is based...". Ashworth, J., justified the issue of certiorari in that case on the following basis: "They (Board) were set up by the executive after the proposal to set them up had been debated in both Houses of Parliament, and the money needed to satisfy their awards is drawn from sums provided by Parliament. It can therefore be said that their existence and their functions have at least been recognized by Parliament, which to my mind has a twofold consequence: in the first place it negatives any notion that the Board are a private tribunal, and secondly it confers on the Board what I may call a public or official character. The number of applications for compensation and the amounts awarded by the Board alike show how greatly the general public are affected by the functioning ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 867). It is without doubt performing a public duty and an important one. This is clear from the expressed willingness of the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to limit legislation in the field of take-overs and mergers and to use the panel as the centerpiece of his regulation of that market. The rights of citizens are indirectly affected by its decisions, some, but by no means all of whom, may in a technical sense be said to have assented to this situation, e.g., the members of the Stock Exchange. At least in its determination of whether there has been a breach of the Code, it has a duty to act judicially and it asserts that its raison d'etre is to do equity between one shareholder and another. Its source of power is only partly based on moral persuasion and the assent of institutions and their members, the bottom line being the statutory powers exercised by the Department of Trade and Industries and the Bank of England. In this context I should be very disappointed if the courts could not recognize the realities of executive power and allowed their vision to be clouded by the subtlety and sometimes complexity of the way in which it can be exerted...". This rule was rei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Statute, to compel it to perform such a statutory function. (3) Although a non-banking finance company like the Muthoot Finance Ltd. with which we are concerned is duty bound to follow and abide by the guidelines provided by the Reserve Bank of India for smooth conduct of its affairs in carrying on its business, yet those are of regulatory measures to keep a check and provide guideline and not a participatory dominance or control over the affairs of the company. (4) A private company carrying on banking business as a Scheduled bank cannot be termed as a company carrying on any public function or public duty. (5) Normally, mandamus is issued to a public body or authority to compel it to perform some public duty cast upon it by some statute or statutory rule. In exceptional cases a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus may issue to a private body, but only where a public duty is cast upon such private body by a statute or statutory rule and only to compel such body to perform its public duty. (6) Merely because a statue or a rule having the force of a statute requires a company or some other body to do a particular thing, it does not possess the attribute of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
