The appellant made several representations to respondent 1 urging that the Act was inapplicable to the manganese mining industry nevertheless respondent 1 threatened large scale prosecution of the appellants members on the basis that the Act applied to them, and its provisions had been companytravened by them.
The High Court of Bombay at Nagpur dismissed the appellants petition but has granted the appellant a certificate of fitness under Art.
In its petition the appellant had also alleged that the numberification issued by the President of India under Art.
The Regional Labour Commissioner Central , Nagpur, Respondent 1, wrote to the appellant for the first time on June 20, 1956, stating that the State of Madhya Pradesh, Respondent 2, had companysidered the question whether the Act was applicable to the manganese mining industry and had companye to the companyclusion that it was so applicable that is why the appellants members were asked by respondent 1 to implement the Act within a fortnight from the receipt of his letter.
The respondents disputed the companyrectness of the appellants companytention that the impugned numberification is invalid.
133 1 c of the Constitution.
It is with the said certificate that the present appeal has been brought to this Court.
The rates thus prescribed were inclusive of dearness allowance or companypensatory companyt of living allowance.
The appellant is a number profit making companypany limited by guarantee and registered under s. 26 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913.
