In the 1975 case of Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagatram Sardar Singh Raghuvanshi, the question of whether statutory corporations established by Acts of Parliament qualify as “States” for the purposes of article 12 of the indian constitution was raised. The case looked at whether workers for these statutory businesses might defend themselves against their employers’ capricious behaviour by citing article 14 of the indian constitution and article 16 of the indian constitution.
sukhdev singh v bhagatram sardar Case Facts
- The oil and natural gas Commission personnel as well as those employed by the Industrial Finance Corporation and the Life Insurance Corporation were let go.
- They brought a high court lawsuit. These three groups contended that the rules are concerning the terms of service that are provided to their workers in the form of a contract. Accepting the claim that these authorities are statutory would mean holding that the staff members of the numerous institutions and organizations covered by the several legislations listed above would be considered to have their terms of employment set by statutes.
- It is not necessary for the removal of an employee in violation of their terms of service to be deemed void, even in the event that their conditions of service are set by statute.
- Employees argued that regulations are developed in accordance with statutes. Statutory authority is the source and origin of the authority to establish regulations. In nature, regulations are self-binding. Regulations are legally binding insofar as the statutory authorities are not permitted to deviate from them.
- Following consideration of the arguments put out by each party, it was decided that the oil and natural gas Commission’s, Life Insurance Corporation’s, and Industrial Finance Corporation’s rules and regulations would take legal effect.
- Employees of these statutory entities are entitled to a declaration of employment in cases where their removal or dismissal violates statutory provisions. These employees have a statutory status.
sukhdev singh v bhagatram sardar Issues
- Is it possible to assert a claim for continued services in the event of an order for removal from service that is in violation of the rules set forth by the Industrial Finance Corporation Act of 1948, the Life Insurance Corporation Act of 1956, the Oil and Natural Gas Commission Act of 1959, or is it restricted to damages claim?
- Is it possible for a worker at a statutory corporation to obtain protection under the article 14 of the indian constitution and article 16 of the indian constitution?
- Are the rules created by delegation under the legislative act enforceable against the parties and having legal force behind them?
- Is the oil and natural gas Commission, Life Insurance Corporation, or Industrial Finance Corporation, for example, public corporations that fall under the definition of “state” under article 12 of the indian constitution?
Contentions by the Parties
Petitioner:
- The statute serves as the basis for the regulations.
- The Act gives the authority to create rules. This indicates that the rules have a binding nature.
- Since the regulations are the result of the statutory authority’s exercise of power, they have legal weight behind them.
- The regulations cannot be deviated from in any way by the statutory authority.
Respondent:
- The regulations are created using the authority granted by the statute to deal with internal management issues.
- There is no legally-binding aspect to the restrictions.
- Statutory requirements do not give rise to the terms and conditions for employees that are outlined in the regulations.
- Not as a law, but as a contract, the requirements are enforceable.
- There is no legal power behind the regulations.
- Every individual’s employment is based on a contract.
sukhdev singh v bhagatram sardar Judgment
- The Court determined that, for the purposes of article 12 of the indian constitution, statutory corporations such as ONGC, LIC, and IFC are “States.” It reasoned that these businesses carry out public tasks, are established by Acts of Parliament, and had the power to enact laws and regulations.
- According to the ruling, workers at these statutory corporations have a right to the defense of their fundamental liberties, especially Articles 14 and 16. This implies that these companies’ activities have to adhere to the ideals of equality and non-discrimination.
- The Court stressed that statutory corporations carrying out public tasks and duties are not allowed to operate in an arbitrary manner and are required to abide by the constitutional requirements that guarantee fairness and equality of treatment in public employment.
Since it establishes that even fundamental rights are enforceable against these organizations and clarifies the character of such groups under article 12 of the indian constitution, the ruling is also significant to Indian legal jurisprudence.
For any latest news, legal topics, judiciary exams notifications, patterns, etc watch Jyoti Judiciary’s YouTube channel for legal videos for any updates at https://youtube.com/@jyotijudiciarycoaching4852?si=2cwubh9d2A9urwJf
