STATE OF ASSAM & ANR. versus BHARAT KALA BHANDAR LTD. & ORS.

STATE OF ASSAM & ANR. versus BHARAT KALA BHANDAR LTD. & ORS.

The notification under Rule 126AA(1) was valid for all employments except veneer mills, as the Governor's opinion was sufficient and not challengeable unless mala fide; however, notifications under Rule 126AA(4) regulating wages and service conditions required prior consultation with affected interests, which was lacking, thus were invalid.

Parties
Appellant: State of Assam; Respondent: Bharat Kala Bhandar Ltd.; Appellant: Naunit Lal; Respondent: Hareshwar Goswami; Respondent: K. Rajendra Chaudhury; Respondent: K. R. Chaudhuri; Respondent: Vineet Kumar; Respondent: I. M. Oberoi; Respondent: S. K. Mehta; Respondent: K. L. Mehta; Respondent: Bishan Narain; Respondent: Bhuvanesh Kumari; Respondent: O. C. Mathur
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 April 1967
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeals / Supreme Court Decision on Appeals From Assam and Nagaland High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part
Legal Topics
Defence of India Rules, Delegated Legislation, Industrial Relations, Wages Regulation, Excessive Delegation, Procedural Requirements for Notifications
Administrative Law Labour Law Emergency Powers Defence of India Rules Delegated Legislation Industrial Relations Wages Regulation Excessive Delegation +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Assam

Appellant

Bharat Kala Bhandar Ltd.

Respondent

Naunit Lal

Appellant

Hareshwar Goswami

Respondent

K. Rajendra Chaudhury

Respondent

K. R. Chaudhuri

Respondent

Vineet Kumar

Respondent

I. M. Oberoi

Respondent

S. K. Mehta

Respondent

K. L. Mehta

Respondent

Bishan Narain

Respondent

Bhuvanesh Kumari

Respondent

O. C. Mathur

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeals / Supreme Court Decision on Appeals From Assam and Nagaland High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Validity of notification under Rule 126AA(1) Defence of India Rules, 1962
  2. 2 Validity of notifications under Rule 126AA(4) Defence of India Rules, 1962
  3. 3 Requirement of consultation with interests concerned before issuance of wage regulation notification

Ratio Decidendi

The notification under Rule 126AA(1) was valid for all employments except veneer mills, as the Governor's opinion was sufficient and not challengeable unless mala fide; however, notifications under Rule 126AA(4) regulating wages and service conditions required prior consultation with affected interests, which was lacking, thus were invalid.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part

Orders

  • Notification under Rule 126AA(1) upheld except for veneer mills employment, which was struck down.
  • Notifications under Rule 126AA(4) struck down for lack of proper consultation.