1655 OF 1973 Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and order dated the 15th October, 1973 of the Gujarat High Court in L.P.A. No.
In Parga Tools Corporations case supra the companypany was incorporated under the Indian Companies Act.
155 of 1972.
In respect of other employees of the companypany, recruitment and service companyditions had to be in accordance with the rules which may be prescribed by the Government from time to time.
Its entire share capital was companytributed by the Central Government and all its shares were registered in the name of the President of India and certain officers of the Central Government.
K. Pillai for Intervener In CA No.
From the Judgment and order dated the 14th July, 1972 of the Gujarat High Court in Spl.
The Union Government and the Government of Andhra Pradesh between them held 56 per cent and 32 per cent of its shares respectively.
115 of 1974 .
1470 of 1968.
The Directors of the companypany were appointed by the President.
This Court held that the employee was number holding an office of profit under the State Government.
2137/72 .
Its Articles of Association as also the Indian Companies Act rendered the ordinary companypany law inapplicable in certain respects and companyferred unlimited powers of management on the President of India and his numberinees.
This Court held that even so, being registered under the Companies Act and governed by the provisions of that Act, the companypany was a separate legal entity and companyld number be said to be either a Government companyporation or an industry run by or under the authority of the Union Government.
115 of 1974 Appeal by special leave from the Judgment dated the 29th January, 1973 of the Delhi High Court in LPA No.
The companyduct of the business of the companypany was subject to the directives issued from time to time by the President of India and its accounts were audited by the auditors appointed by the Central Government on the advice of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.
S. Nariman, Addl.
and number less than two, and number more than eight, other members appointed by the Central Government.
Under the Articles of Association of the companypany the first Directors of the companypany were Minister in Charge of the Industries Portfolio in the Mysore Government, the Secretaries to the Mysore Government in the Finance Department, and in the Commerce and Industries Department, the Managing Director of the Mysore Iron Steel Ltd., and the Chief Conservator of Forest, of the Mysore Government.
The wages and salaries of its employees were also determined in accordance with the said directions.
S. Nariman, Addl.
by the Mysore Government.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
1879/72 .
Gen. of India, Y. J. Taraporewala, C. Mathur, Mohan Prasad Jha and K. J. John for the Applicant Intervener Air India The following Judgments were delivered RAY, C.J. There are two questions for companysideration in these appeals.
The Union Government had the power to numberinate the companypanys directors.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
In short the question is whether these statutory companyporations are authorities within the meaning of Article 12.
it was, therefore, a Government companypany.
It was pointed out by the Constitution Bench of this Court that though the companypany was a limited one and therefore had a distinct companyporate existence, it was in effect financed and companytrolled by the Central Government.
In the Heavy Engineering case supra the companypany was one incorporated under the Companies Act.
First, whether an order for removal from service companytrary to regulations framed under the Oil and Natural Gas Commission Act, 1959 the Industrial Finance Corporation Act, 1948 and the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 would enable the employees to a declaration against the statutory companyporation of companytinuance in service or would only give rise to a claim for damages.
Hindustan Steel was a Government companypany and a private limited companypany.
The last one.was a Government undertaking incorporated under the Indian Companies Act.
One of the members shall be a whole time, Finance Member in charge of the financial matters relating to the Commission.
All the same this Court treated that companypany like any other companypany registered under the Indian Companies Act.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
1879 OF 1972 AND CIVIL APPEAL NO.
Pramod Swarup for the appellant In CA No.
Second whether an employee of a statutory companyporation is entitled to claim protection of Articles 14 and 16 against the Corporation.
The companyposition of the Commission is the Chairman, and number less than two, and number more than eight, other members appointed by the Central Government.
115/74.
The Governor was also entitled to appoint from amongst the numberinated Directors a Chairman And Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors.
The statutes for companysideration are the Oil and Natural Gas Commission Act, 1956 the Indutrial Finance Corporation Act.
In its standing orders, the companypany was described as a Government undertaking.
K. Ramamurthy, J. Ramamurthy for Respondents In CAs.
The Governor of Mysore was entitled to appoint all or a majority of the members of the Board of Directors so long as the Government of Mysore held number less than 51 per cent of the total paid up capital of the companypany or so long as the Governor companytinued to be interested in any fiduciary capacity.
Civil Appln.
2137/72 , A. K. Sen In CA 1655/73 , B. Dutta for the Appellants.
The functions and the terms and companyditions of service of such employees shall be such as may be provided by regulations made under the 1959 Act.
The shares of the companypany were held cent per cent 1 359 U. S. 536, at 546 547.
Thus the State Government had companysiderable companytrol in appointment of Directors of the companypany as well as in the appointment of the Managing Director who was to be appointed by the Governor from amongst the Directors numberinated by him.
The annual report of the working of the companypany and its affairs along with the Audit Report had to be placed before the Parliament.
K. Garg, S. C. Agarwala, S. S. Bhatnagar, Y. J. Francis, Ramamurthy Co. for Respondent No.
1655/ 73 .
1 In CA.
The entire equity capital of the companypany was held by the President of India and his numberinees and the entire Board of Directors was numberinated by Mm.
1948 and the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956.
2137 of 1972.
S. Nariman, Addl.
It was entirely owned by the Union of India.
The Oil and Natural Gas Commission Act, 1959 hereinafter referred to as the 1959 Act established the Commission as a body companyporate having perpetual succession and a companymon seal.
The Memorandum of Association and the Articles of Association of the companypany companyferred large powers on the Central Government in eluding the, power to give directions as regards the functioning of the Company.
K. Ramamurthy, Janardan Sharma and Jitendra Sharma for Appellant in C.A. No.
Gen In CA.
Under section 12 of the 1959 Act the Commission may, for the purpose of performing its functions or exercising its powers, appoint such number of employees as it may companysider necessary.
It was a private limited companypany registered under the name of Mysore Iron Steel Limited, Bhadravati.
The Central Government may, if it thinks fit, appoint one, of the members as Viw Chairman of the Commission.
Gen. of India, I. N. Shroff for Respondent No.
Service companyditions of the workmen and other matters were subject to the approval of the President of India.
Even the Secretary of the companypany had to be appointed by the Board of Directors after obtaining approval of the Governor.
Dividends declared by the companypany entirely went to the companyfers of the State.
1655/73 and 1879/72 and for Intervener In CA No.
In Gurushantappa v. Abdul Khaddus 1969 3 SCR 425 the question whether an employee in a companypany owned by Government was holding an office of profit was companysidered.
95 of 1973.
