JUDGEMENT
K.N.Singh, J. -
(1.) The petitioner was
selected and appointed as labour welfare
officer, grade III, by the management of the
Ajudhia Sugar Mills in the district of
Moradabad. As the petitioner was more than
twenty-six years of age he applied to the State
Government for exemption from the age
restriction. The State Government by its
order, dated 27 October 1971, granted exemption to the petitioner from the requisite
qualification of age. The petitioner thereafter
continued in service On 25 August 1972, the
State Government, however, passed another
order cancelling the exemption granted to the
petitioner. The petitioner made a representation to the State Government for the review
of its order, dated 25 August 1972. The State
Government refused to review the order and
rejected the petitioner's application by its
order, dated 31 August 1973. The petitioner
thereupon filed this petition under Art. 226 of
the Constitution challenging the validity of
the orders of the State Government, dated
25 August 1972 and 31 August 1973.
(2.) Section 49 of the Factories Act, 1948,
requires every factory employing five hundred
or more workers to appoint welfare officers.
The State Government is empowered to prescribe qualifications and conditions of service of
labour welfare officers. In pursuance of the said
requirement the State Government of Uttar
Pradesh framed Factories Welfare Officers'
Rules, 1955, prescribing qualifications and
other conditions of service of the welfare
officers. Rule 9 lays down that no person
shall be appointed, as a welfare officer unless
he fulfills the qualifications mentioned therein.
Rule 9 contains five Cls. (a) to (e), which lay
down that a person must be a citizen of India
or a subject of Sikkim and he must be within
the age group as mentioned in CI. (h) and he
must have thorough Knowledge of Hindi in
Devenagari script under CI. (d) and he must
possess a degree of a university established by
law in case of appointment to grade III under
CI. (d). Clause (e) requires that he must possess
diploma of Labour Training College or social
science class or social technique from the
institutions named therein. Rule 13 confers
powers on the State Government to exempt
any person from all or any of the qualifications
prescribed in rule 9 if such person is a
graduate of a university established by law
and has three years practical experience of
work relating to labour well are in the case of
grade I, two years in the case of grade II and
one year in the case of grade III. Rule 13
confers power on the State Government to
grant exemption from all or any of the
qualifications prescribed in rule 9 in case of
only those persons who fulfilled the two conditions prescribed therein. The petitioner
prior to his selection and appointment in the
Ajudhia Sugar Mills was employed as assistant
welfare organizer in the Coal Mines Welfare
Organization under the Ministry of Labour
and Employment, Government of India, for a
period of three and a half years.
While working as assistant welfare officer in the coal
mines the petitioner had acquired three years
practical experience of work relating to the
welfare of labour. He holds a degree in
Master of Arts in Political Science and also
holds the Degree of Master of Social Work
from the University of Agra. The petitioner,
therefore, fulfilled the two requisite qualifications
necessary to claim exemption under
rule 13. The State Government found the
petitioner entitled to exemption and thereupon
it issued the order, dated 27 October 1971,
granting exemption to the petitioner under
rule 13 read with rule 9 (b) (iii),
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner urged
that the order of the State Government, dated
27 August 1972, was passed in violation of
principles of natural justice inasmuch as the
petitioner was not afforded any opportunity of
hearing or explanation :on behalf of the State
Government it is not disputed that the petitioner
was not given any opportunity prior to
the issue of the order, dated 25 August 1972.
An order granting exemption under rule 13 of
the Factories Welfare Officers' Rules, 1955, is
no doubt an administrative order and it is
open to the State Government to review or
revise the same if the order is found to have
been issued on account of any misrepresentation,
fraud or mistake. Any order issued
under rule 13 granting exemption from any of
the qualifications prescribes in rule 9 confers
right on the person co secure employment as
welfare officer and any subsequent order
passed by the State Government cancelling
that exemption granted by it earlier would
adversely affect the right of the person concerned.
In this view, it is imperative for the
State Government to afford opportunity to
the person concerned against whom the order
of review may be passed cancelling the exemption granted in his favour. No doubt the
rules do not contain any provision for review
or for affording any opportunity to the person
concerned but it is well settled that whenever
the right of a person is affected by the order
passed by a statutory authority it must act in
accordance with the principles of natural
justice. As the order of cancellation would
affect the rights of person in whose favour the
exemption may have been granted it is necessary for the State Government to afford
opportunity to the person concerned. Any
order passed in violation of the principles
of natural justice would be illegal and void.
In the instant case State Government's order,
dated 25 August 1972, was passed without
affording any opportunity to the petitioner,
therefore, the order is rendered void.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.