Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3
PETITIONER:
SABHAJIT TEWARY
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT21/02/1975
BENCH:
RAY, A.N. (CJ)
BENCH:
RAY, A.N. (CJ)
MATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN
CHANDRACHUD, Y.V.
ALAGIRISWAMI, A.
GUPTA, A.C.
CITATION:
1975 AIR 1329 1975 SCC (1) 485
CITATOR INFO :
R 1976 SC 888 (10)
RF 1976 SC2216 (7)
RF 1979 SC1628 (31)
RF 1981 SC 212 (38,42)
R 1981 SC 487 (13)
R 1981 SC1395 (10)
D 1984 SC 541 (8,12,13)
RF 1986 SC1571 (50,52)
RF 1988 SC 469 (6,7,8,10)
RF 1992 SC 76 (8)
ACT:
Constitution of India, Arts, 12 and 14--Council of
Scientific and Industrial Research ’if authority’.
HEADNOTE:
The petitioner, a stenographer in the Council of Scientific
and Industrial Research. contended that certain letters
relating to his remuneration were discriminatory, as far as
ha was concerned, and violative of Art. 14.
Dismissing the petition,
HELD : The respondent Council is not an authority within the
meaning of Art. 12 and the petitioner was, therefore, not
entitled to invoke Art. 14 against it. [618B-C]
The Council does not have a statutory character like the Oil
and Natural Gas Commission or the life Insurance Corporation
or the 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 cooperation 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 institution.,. for- scientific study of problems
affecting particular industry in a trade, and the
utilisation of the result of the researches conducted under
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3
the auspices of the Council towards the development of
industries in the country, are carried out in a responsible
manner. [617E-H]
Praga Tools Corporation v. C. A. Imanual & Ors. [1969] 3
S.C.R. 773. Heavy Engineering Mazdoor Union v. The State of
Bihar & Ors. [1969] 3 S.C.R. 995 and S. L. Agarwal v. Gene-
rat Manager. Hindiustan Steel Ltd. [1970] 3 S.C.R.
363. referred to.
JUDGMENT:
ORIGINAI, JURISDICTION : Writ Petition No. 43 of 1972.
Petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India.
B. R. G. K. Acher, for the petitioner.
F. S. Nariman , Additional Solicitor General of India and
Rameshwar Nath, for respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
RAY, C.J.-In Writ Petition No. 43 of 1972 the petitioner who
is junior stenographer in the Council of Scientific and
Industrial Research asked for an order declaring two letter-
to be discriminatory and violative of Article 14. The two
letters relate to recommendations of the Finance Sub-
Committee of the Council of Scientific and Industrial
Research with regard to remuneration of stenographers. In
short, the petitioners allegations are that he should be
granted the same number of advance increments as approved
and granted to new currents.
617
in order to entitle the petitioner to impeach the circular
on the ground of infraction of Article 14 and 16, the
petitioner has to establish that the Council of Scientific
and Industrial Research is an authority within the meaning
of Article 12 of the Constitution.
The Council is a society registered under the Societies
Registration Act. Reliance was placed by counsel for the
petitioner on these features of the society. Under Rule, 3,
the Prime Minister of India is the ex-officio President of
the Society. The Governing Body under Rule 30 consists of
inter alia some persons appointed by the Government of India
representing the administrative Ministry under which the
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research is included,
and the Ministry of Finance and one or more members
appointed by the Government of India. The Government of
India may terminate the membership of any member or at one
and the same time of all members other than the ex-officio
members of the Governing Body. Rule 45 states that the
Governing Body shall have the management of all the affairs
and funds of the Society. Rule 46 states that the Governing
Body shall have power, with the sanction of the Government
of India to frame, amend or repeal bye-laws not inconsistent
with the rules for the administration and management of the
affairs of the Society and in particular to provide for the
terms and tenure of appointments, employments, allowances,
rules of discipline and other conditions of service of the
officers and staff of the Society. Reference was also made
to the Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules,
1961 and in particular to page 76 where it is stated that
all matters relating to the Council of Scientific and
Industrial Research are under the department of Science and
Technology.
Extracting the features as aforesaid, it was contended that
these would indicate that the Council of Scientific and
Industrial Research was really an agency of the Government.
This contention is unsound. The Society does not have a
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3
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 of problems affecting Particular industry
in a trade, the utilisation 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.
This Court has he1d in Praga Tools Corporation v. C. A.
lmanual & Ors. [1969] 3 S.C.R. 773. Heavy Engineering
Mazdoor Union v. The State of Bihar & Ors. [1969] 3 S.C.R.
995 and in S. I,. Agarwal v. General Manager Hindustan
Steel Ltd. [1970] 3 SC.R. 363 that the Praga Tools
Corporation, Heavy Engineering 70 Sup. CI/75
618
Mazdoor Union and Hindustan Steel Ltd. are all companies
incorporated under the Companies Act and the employees of
these companies do not enjoy the protection available to
Government servants as contemplated in Article 311. The
companies were held in these cases to have independent
existence of the Government and by the law relating to
corporations. These could not be held to be departments of
the Government.
For these reasons we are of opinion that the Council of
Scientific and Industrial Research is not an authority
within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution. The
writ petition is dismissed. Parties will pay and bear their
own costs in this Writ Petition.
V.P.S. Petition dismissed.
619