RATNAKAR VISHWANATH JOSHI Vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNDER Article 226 of the Constitution, this Court can order the enforcement of certain public law rights (as distinguished from private law rights, e. g. , rights based on contracts ). Can such a right arise out of an administrative scheme or instructions (as distinguished from "law" or orders having the force of law) issued by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (as contrasted with the Government) with respect to a class of its employees ? Can this Court review administrative action by the Chairman of the Corporation withdrawing such scheme or instructions without authority ? These would appear to be the ultimate issues arising in this writ petition in the back-ground of the following facts and law.

(2.) THE Corporation (respondent 1) was established by the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 to carry on the business of life insurance as a monopoly on business principles (Section 6 ). It can act itself Section 4 or through committees Section 19. It has power to appoint its staff Section 23. Under Section 49 of the Act, the Corporation may, with the previous approval of the Central Government, by notification in the Gazette of India, make regulations not inconsistent with the Act or the rules made by the Central Government under S 48 there of to provide for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of the Act. It has made two sets of regulations, namely, (1) The Regulations, 1959; and (2) Staff Regulations, 1960. Regulation 32 (a) authorises the Chairman to exercise all the powers of the Corporation or the committees, Regulation 33 authorises the Chairman to exercise all the powers of the Corporation in emergency. Staff Regulation 59 as amended with effect from. 7-8-1971 empowers the Corporation to sanction "merit awards and payments to employees in accordance with such schemes as it may approve from time to time. "

(3.) ACTUARIES play an important role in insurance business. The number of Actuaries in India has been rapidly diminishing in recent years. With a view to encourage its employees to qualify themselves as Actuaries, the Corporation approved a scheme in the form of administrative instructions. The scheme was issued by the Chairman of the Corporation, purporting to act under Regulation 4 of the Staff Regulations which enables the Chairman to issue instructions or directions to carry out the provisions of Staff Regulations. On 31-7-71 a circular was addressed to all the offices of the Corporation by its Executive Director and the scheme was annexed to the said circular. Briefly a person has to pass examinations in various Subjects to qualify as an associate or a fellow of the Institute of Actuaries. An employee of the Corporation passing an examination in any of these Subjects was given a special, pay as a reward for passing each of these examinations. The scheme was brought into force from 1-91970 and was to last for five years. The petitioners are among those Class I Officers of the Corporation who benefited by the scheme. The Association of Class I Officers, however, (respondent 5) pro. tested against the scheme with the Chairman (respondent 4 ). On 6-3-72, therefore, the Chairman purported to enter into an agreement with the Association of the Class I Officers and thereby withdrew the scheme of 31-7-1971.