Sabhajit Tewary v. Union of India & Ors.
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- Judge
- A.N. Ray (as recorded by the source, often the author only; the full bench is in the PDF)
- Report
- [1975] 3 S.C.R. 616
- Neutral citation
- 1975 INSC 43
- Disposal
- Dismissed (as recorded on the court portal)
- Document type
- Judgment reported in the Supreme Court Reports
- Court text: read by machine (OCR) from a scan of the printed report. It contains reading errors: check every quotation against the PDF.
- Summary: not yet written.
- Headnotes: the report's editorial headnotes are not shown.
Extraction check needed: source images require visual review: pages 1; unassigned small-font lines retained outside body: check against the PDF.
Judgment
who_i., . _RAY, C.J.-In Writ Pd.ition No. 43 of 1972 the petitioner
in Scientific and lndustnal JUnmr stenographer the Council of Research .... ked f d ·' · · · t·'r}·
or cr ucclannp; two lt:tters to discnmu •
• . '.~...... or~ l~ .l v t'nd vz~h~Jve CJf Article 14. The two Jetter~ rclat~ to recon.unen<hj t>ns.
. t le F'lllancc Sub Committee of the Council of Scientific an l~d~:mu Resea~c}l with regard to remuneration of stenographers. same ort, \he pctJtJOners allegations are that ho should be granted tbe tntran~s~m :>er of advance increments as approved and granted to neW
In order to entitle the petitioner to impeach the. ~ircular on the ground of infraction of Article 14 and 16, the ~ettttoner ha~ to establi~h that the Council of Scientific and Industnal Research ts an authod1y within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution. The Council is a society registered under the Societies Registra tion Act. Reliance was placed by counsel fo~ the ~t!tioner on t?e~e features of the society. Under Rule 3, the Pnme Mtmster of Ind1a the ex-c:ffi.cio President of the Society. The Governing Body under Rule 30 consists of inter alia some persons appointed by the Govern ment of India representing the administrative Ministry under which the Council of Scientific and Industrit~l Research is included, and the
.Ministry of Finance and one or more member~~ appointed by the
c 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 lrldia 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 condition·s 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 statutory character like the Oil and Natural Gas Commission. or the Life Insurance Corporation or Indus trial Finance Corporation. It is a society incorporated in accordance wit}} the provisions of the Societies Registration Act. The fac~ that the Prime Minister is the President or that the Government appoints nominees to the Governing Body or that the Government may termi nate the membership will not establish anything more than the fact that th~~ Government takes special care t;1at the promotion. guidance ~nd co-operation of scientific and industrial research. the institution and financing of soecific researches, establi<ihment or develooment and assistance to special institutions or departments of the aisting institutions for scientific studv of problems affectinl! narticuhr industrv in a trade, the utilisation of the result of the rese~rchcs conducted U!lder the ausoices of the Council towards the dcvelonm~nt of indus tries in the country arc carried out in a rcspon<;ible manner.
c.
This Court ha<; hl"lrl in PrnOtJ Tnfll\· rorTJOI'tilitll? v. (i.IJ•·i A. Imamtal & Ors. f19691 3 S.C.R. 773. f:nni""Prill" Ma:::donr
HPfl\.\' Union v. Thr! State of Bihar & Ors. f1 Q69l 3 S.C.R. 995 anti in
S. L A~arwrd v. GenPm[ MmULf!l!r Hi11rlus'm1 Stt>e[ Ltd. [1970J 3 S C.R. 363 that the Praga Tools Corporation. H eavy E.1ginccring Mazdoor Union and Hindustan Steel Ltd. are all companies incor porated under the Companies Act and the employees of these com panies do not enjoy the protection available to Government servants as (:Ontemplated in Article 311. The companies were held in these
, ~:ase!S to have . independent existence of the Government and by the Jaw relating to corporations. These could not be held to be de~art ments of the Government.
For these rt,asons we are of opinion that the Council of Scien.tific and Industrial Research is not an authority within the meaning. of J'uticle 12 of the Constitution. The writ petition is dismissed.
Parties will pay and bear their own costs in this Writ Petition. v.r.s.
Petition dismissed.
Source
Judgment of the Supreme Court of India, reported at [1975] 3 S.C.R. 616. Text and metadata from Indian Supreme Court Judgments by Dattam Labs, licensed CC BY 4.0; text extracted and formatted by this site.
Original PDF (hosted by the dataset provider; includes the report's headnotes). CNR: ESCR010002251975.