PYARE LAL SHARMA Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR J AND K INDUSTRIES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A Full Bench of this court in Abdul Ahad Loan v. Manager Govt. Woollen Mills, AIR 1979 J and K, 57 after a review of a catena of authorities opined that a company incorporated under the Companies Act, and governed by the provisions of the Companies Act, cannot be characterised as an 'authority', State, or an agent of the State and in that view of the matter held that the Jammu and Kashmir Industries (Private) Ltd, is a company and not an authority within the meaning of Art.12 of the Constitution and is not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this court. Placing reliance on this judgment, a preliminary objection was raised by the learned counsel for the respondent challenging the maintainability of the writ petition, before a learned single Judge of this Court. Kotwal, J. (as his Lordship then was) doubted whether or not the aforesaid (F.B) authority still holds field in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib, AIR 1981 SC 487 and, therefore, he referred the case for an authoritative pronouncement before a Full Bench as it involved the reconsideration of the Full Bench of this Court in AIR 1979 J and K 57.

(2.) The Full Bench in Abdul Ahad's case to which one of us namely Anand, J., was a party and who had authored the judgment, considered a catena of authorities and opined that a company registered under the Companies Act and incorporated in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act, cannot be treated as a statutory body because it is not created by the statute. The Full Bench opined :

(3.) In taking the aforesaid view the Full Bench relied upon the various judgments of the Supreme Court and particularly those reported in Heavy Engineering Mazdoor Union v. State of Bihar AIR 1970 SC 82, Dr. S. L Agarwal v. Gen. Manager Hindustan Steel Ltd., AIR 1970 SC 1150, Praga Tools Corporation v. C. V. Imanual AIR 1969 SC 1306 and Subhajit Tewary v. Union of India, AIR 1975 SC 1329.