PG NO 927 Rajinder Sachar, G.B. Pai, Narayan Shetty, K.T. Anantharaman, Mrs. P.S. Shroff, S. Shroff, Ms. Girija Krishan, C.C. Mathur, A.M. Mittal, D.N. Mishra, Dalbir Bhandari, Ms. C.K. Sucharita and Ms. A. Subhashini for the appearing parties.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DUTT, J. Of these three appeals by special leave.
Hence this appeal by special leave.
we may first of all deal with Civil Appeal No.
3214 of 1979 for.
admittedly, the disposal of that appeal will virtually mean the disposal of the other two appeals.
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.8.1979 of the Delhi High Court in Civil Writ Petition No.
3214 of 1979 is directed against the judgment of the Delhi High Court whereby the High Court has quashed a circular dated March 8, 1978 issued by the Board of Directors of Caltex Oil Refinery India Ltd. for short CORIL ,a Government Company, on the writ petition filed by the employees of CORIL being Writ Petition No.
426 of 1978.
3212 of 1979 has been preferred by the writ petitioners in civil Writ Petition No.
The said Civil Appeal No.
At the hearing of the said writ petition before the High Court it was companytended on behalf of the respondents Nos.
426 of 1978.
Under section 3 of the Act, the share in the capital of the CORILS stood transferred to and vested in the Central Government On the appointed day being December 30, 1976.
The Caltex Acquisition of Shares of Caltex Refining India Ltd. and of the undertakings in India of Caltex India Ltd. Act 17 of 1977, hereinafter referred to as the Act, was enacted by the Union Parliament and came into force with effect from April Z3.
It was submitted by the said respondents that under the said circular the terms and companyditions of service of the employees of CORIL had been substantially and adversely altered to their prejudice.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Civil Appeal No.
All the companytentions except the last companytention of the respondents Nos.
426 of 1978 challenging the legality and validity of the impugned order.
1 to 4, who were some of the employees of CORIL, filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court being Civil Writ Petition No.
After the issue of the said circular, the respondents Nos.
The High Court, however, took the view that as numberopportunity was given to the employees of CORIL before the impugned circular was issued, the Board of Directors of CORIL acted illegally and in violation of the principles of natural justice.
1 to 4 were rejected by the High Court.
Besides the above companytentions, another companytention was advanced on behalf of the respondents Nos.
426 of 1978 filed before the High Court.
1 and 4, namely, that the employees number having been given an opportunity of being heard before altering to their prejudice the terms and companyditions of service, the impugned circular should be struck down as void being opposed to the principles of natural justice.
3212 of 1979 etc.
The writ petitioners succeded in getting the impugned circular quashed by the High Court.
