MODERN FOOD INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD Vs. M D JUVEKER
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MODERN FOOD INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD
M D Juveker
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)The first appellant Modern Food Industries (India) Ltd. also known as Modern Bakeries (India) Ltd. a Government Company registered under the Companies Act 1956 having its registered office at New Delhi and Units spread all over the country including Ahmedabad has filed this appeal against the order of R. C Mankad J. dated 8/10/1987 in Special Civil Application No. 1326 of 1980 (Reported in M. D. Juvekar v. Modern Bakeries (India) Ltd. 1987 (2) GLR 1375) whereby he set aside the order terminating the services of the respondent and directed his reinstatement in service with effect from 21/04/1980 the date of termination of his service with full back wages and continuity in service. Appellant No. 2 is the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of appellant No. 1. Appellant No. 3 is the General Manager of appellant No. 1 of the Ahmedabad Unit situate at Naroda Industrial Estate Ahmedabad.
(2.)The appellants have raised three contentions in this appeal. They are:
(1)Whether the Modern Food Industries (India) Ltd. a Government Company incorporated under the Companies Act falls within the definition of `the State under Art. 12 of the Constitution of India. Whether clause 2.18 of the Staff Regulations is illegal and void on the ground of being unconscionable and opposed to public policy i.e. contrary to Sec. 23 of the Contract Act as also violative of Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India ?
(2)Whether this High Court was competent to entertain the petition brought by the respondent-employee who was posted at the date of the termination of his service at the Calcutta Unit of the appellant No. 1 Company merely because communication of the termination order was received by him at Ahmedabad while on leave.
(3.)The learned single Judge has come to the conclusion that the appellant No. 1 Company was the State within the meaning of Art. 12 of the Constitution; that Regulation 2.18 of the Staff Regulations was illegal and void as violative of Sec. 23 of the Contract Act and ultra vires Arts. 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution and that this High Court had jurisdiction to entertain the petition as the consequence of the termination order fell on the respondent at Ahmedabad where he was served with the impugned order. The appellants being aggrieved by these findings recorded by the learned single Judge have preferred this appeal.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.