Bombay High Court Allows Trade Union's Petition, Directs State Financial Corporation to Implement Revised Pay Scales Without State Approval. Omission of Proviso to Section 23 of State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 Removes Requirement of State Government's Approval for Autonomous Corporation's Service Conditions.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 33
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Bhartiya Kamgar Karmachari Mahasangh, a registered trade union and recognized union of the Maharashtra State Financial Corporation (Respondent No.1), filed a writ petition seeking implementation of revised pay scales for employees as per the VIth Pay Commission. The Board of Directors of the Corporation had passed a resolution on 1.2.2012 approving the revised pay scales and reiterated the decision in a subsequent meeting, but implementation was withheld pending approval from the State of Maharashtra (Respondent No.2). The petitioner argued that Respondent No.1 is an autonomous statutory corporation under the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951, and under Section 23 of the Act, the Corporation has the power to lay down service conditions including pay scales. The petitioner further contended that the proviso to Section 23, which required state government approval, was omitted by Amendment Act 39 of 2000 with effect from 5.9.2000, and thus no approval was necessary. Respondent No.1 admitted the resolution but stated that implementation awaited state approval. The State argued that the Corporation had incurred revenue losses. The court examined Section 23 of the Act and noted that the proviso requiring state approval was omitted. The court held that the Corporation, being an autonomous body, has the power to determine service conditions of its employees without state approval. The court directed Respondent No.1 to implement the revised pay scales within four weeks from the date of the order, rejecting the State's objection regarding revenue losses as irrelevant. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Labour Law - Pay Revision - Autonomous Corporation - Section 23, State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 - The petitioner trade union sought implementation of revised pay scales as per VIth Pay Commission approved by Board of Directors - The court held that after the omission of the proviso to Section 23 by Amendment Act 39 of 2000, the approval of the State Government is no longer necessary - The Corporation being an autonomous body has power to determine service conditions of its employees - The Board resolution was valid and binding - The court directed implementation within four weeks (Paras 1-8).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the approval of the State Government is necessary for the implementation of revised pay scales by an autonomous State Financial Corporation under the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951, after the omission of the proviso to Section 23.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is allowed. Respondent No.1 is directed to implement the revised pay scales as per the resolution of the Board of Directors within four weeks from the date of the order. Rule is made absolute. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Autonomous statutory corporation can determine service conditions without state approval after omission of proviso to Section 23 of SFC Act
  • 1951
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2013 LawText (BOM) (12) 150

WRIT PETITION NO. 1508 OF 2013

2013-12-17

V. M. KANADE, M.S.SONAK

2013:BHC-OS:11971-DB

Mr.C.G. Gavanekar i/b. Mr.G.S. Hiranandani for Petitioner, Mr.V.P. Sawant with Mrs. N.R. Patankar for Respondent No.1, Mr.J.S. Saluja -AGP for Respondent No.2

Bhartiya Kamgar Karmachari Mahasangh

The Maharashtra State Financial Corporation, State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition seeking implementation of revised pay scales for employees of a State Financial Corporation.

Remedy Sought

Direction to Respondent No.1 to implement the revised pay scales as per the VIth Pay Commission approved by its Board of Directors.

Filing Reason

Non-implementation of Board resolution approving revised pay scales pending approval from State Government.

Previous Decisions

Board of Directors passed resolution on 1.2.2012 approving revised pay scales and reiterated decision in subsequent meeting.

Issues

Whether the approval of the State Government is necessary for implementation of revised pay scales by an autonomous State Financial Corporation under the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 after omission of proviso to Section 23.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner: Respondent No.1 is an autonomous body; under Section 23 of SFC Act, it has power to determine service conditions; proviso requiring state approval was omitted by Amendment Act 39 of 2000; hence no approval necessary. Respondent No.1: Admitted resolution but stated implementation awaited state approval. Respondent No.2 (State): Corporation incurred revenue losses; approval not granted.

Ratio Decidendi

After the omission of the proviso to Section 23 of the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 by Amendment Act 39 of 2000, the approval of the State Government is no longer necessary for an autonomous State Financial Corporation to determine the service conditions of its employees, including pay scales. The Corporation has the power under Section 23 to lay down such conditions without external approval.

Judgment Excerpts

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner has submitted that the approval of Respondent No.2 is not necessary since the Respondent No.1 is an autonomous body. It is submitted that section 23 of the said Act was amended by virtue of the Amendment Act 39 of 2000 with effect from 5.9.2000 and the proviso which was added to the said section by Amendment Act 77 of 1972 was omitted. In our view, the submission made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner is well founded and deserves to be accepted.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Rule was issued and made returnable forthwith by consent of parties. The court heard the counsel for all parties and delivered judgment on 17 December 2013.

Acts & Sections

  • State Financial Corporations Act, 1951: 23, 25
  • Trade Union Act, 1926:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Trade Union's Petition, Directs State Financial Corporation to Implement Revised Pay Scales Without State Approval. Omission of Proviso to Section 23 of State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 Removes Requirement of State Gove...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC for Throwing Petrol Bottle into Fire Causing Death. Accused's Act of Throwing Petrol Bottle into Coal Fire Held to be Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder, as Knowledge of Likely...