IN THE HI(}H COURT 0?' IIQEQNATAKA M BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 5 TH DAY 01:' fem: 2009
BEFORE
THE HON'IE3LE MRJUSTICE SUBHASH B'.:é'x{,7"r.i_A' "
wan' PETITIOK xo.19o1(2w9 'V ' If V' T} %
BETWEEN: . L'
VODAFONE ESSAR SOUTH um.
Prestige Biue Chip "
Ground Floor, Block I
No.9, Hessur Road
Banga1orc~56O 029.
Repnessnted by its Head ---
Shri Sanjit Nezmsh V v _ .'.""§?E'FITIGNER
(By Sfi.Vijayashai11£éu;_, VVsr%,'A:a§; ft;1f-_VV_.
M] s.Guj-rura} Agata}, 'Adv3}) _
AND: V " V V V' "
1. The Statefiii
Re;:=re'sentcd by Chief Secretary
ggudha ..... .. v
' «agagaloxeesap 001.
2}' .'I"}3L;: Staiepf Kaihataka
Reptesenifid by its Secretary
Be}')ax't:t1'cI1t*" of Labour
M. S. Buflding, Dr. B. R.Ambedkar Veedhi
AAB;6{) 001.
'?hc,i..abour Commissioner
Bhavan, Bannerghatta Road
.. ___§3a11gaIore--56O O29.
-. The Senior Labour Inspector
3'& Circle, & Bhavana, Bannerghatta Road
Bangalore.
"N
'mow /
5. The Senier Labour inspector
23"' Cimle, Karmika Bhavana
Bannsrghatta Road
Bangalore.
(By Stiudaya Bella, Advocate General).
This Writ Petition is fiaea tmcier 226 3; 2.22:? .
.. Rp:sPC>4i~'é"D:3:i§'§4.é.#:; ff" : A
Constimfion of india praying to aicclaxt ti1cVprov;sién}.'2.._9f Rlules v
2445 and 26 cf the Katnataky-3V--S}1ops'.. 'and
Estabfishments Ruins, 1963 and *t11c Shops 8:.
Oommercial Establishments.z(Am¢31€im¢nt)'"»R111es, am void
and unconstitutional as Vic_.)_1a*.ing_ A3§tic1e._ 'land 19(1)(a) of the
Constitution of India so far the_T.peti1ié)1&er_is._c:~:}Iiccrned, etc.,.
This Pei:iti<;mfi havizzgé reserved on
1 1 .3.2{)(}9 and coi111irggV-oz: for fkfinofincémeni' of Orders this day,
the Court reaadggtblc __fé:11zigvi:1«g_;--
. . ' . .. D
Pefifionéf "g;§:e<.:]arzat:ion, declaring that. the
provisions of ER-u 1ev of the Kaxnataka Shops and
" Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to
the Karnataka Shops and Commercial
V V(%s'9Li;1end£uent) Rules, 2008 (hereinafter refermd
' ':9 as '1'g'4¥u1e;.25i€xv.xc'i:L.(;1xnent Rules') are void and uncaenstitutionai as
: ific;-ilaiivrrf.'Ao{A1*ti<:1c 13 and 19 sub-mficxe (1) clause (a) of the
of Inéia insofar as the petitioner is concerned and
T for quashing Rule 2445 anfi 26 of the Rules and the
Rmendment Rules and consequentiy also for quashing the
W
M!"
notices issued by respondent Nose and 5 dated 6.1.2-Q09
produced at Annexures-C and D.
2. Petitioner is a Company VV _
pmvisions of the Companies Act and
the Department of Teieeexsjmenieefiefis. n
Communications, Government of to ‘ ‘
mebile telephene sexvices {he
Petitioner renders its name of
“Vodafone” in about In order to
make the Elempany available to the
consumers’ dealers, distributors,
outlets, on the trade nagree by
seihng SIM teisted commodities, petitioner has
‘e~peIi€5:’:s_4i:E?lS stores Where it is rendering service to the
Ve’t1steifiers;~._V Esee “store displays the hade name “VODAFONE”
in fittsnfef si1e§1f sieie. Te carry on the business in accordance
had applied for grant of licence under the
egfexiisiezggs 5:” the Act and Ruies made thereunder. Petitioner
eeiaining the licence has opened severe} outlets, stores,
“‘«riisfiibufien centres displaying its trade name or brand name as
‘4 4V(}DAFONE” in front of its outiets by speeding nearly about 6
.2 K
.9»
(more rupees.
3. The State Government by notification dated 31.’
amended the Rules by substituting Rule 24-A
for exhibition of name board and maiiing it
estabiishment to show the name
more pxedominantly by jpmviding _more seace
language and by amending R111§–.e.’/éfi, previded» for
contravention. Within 1v:b’..g1’ayg* <$i'" 'tile Labour
Commissioner fo::wardeei VA to various
departments same within two
days Without§'efie§_ :l!;1:a pursuance of the same,
Senior Lab"0u2+. as per Annexures-C and
D '=.upo:n 'ten ehow cause as to why action
should not to Show the name board or a
preéoeiieagfiiy in Kannada language.
V ‘..4″pe::Vt:i1f.iofi.er – Company being aggrieved by the
noaacamg . Ruie 24-A and 26 of the Rules and
‘cpnsequefitéai netices has filed this Writ Petition.
VA * On behalf of the petitioner, Sn’.Vijayashankar, learned
Couzztsel submitted that, Rule 24–~A of the Rules is ultra
.. ; m’res and unconstittittitmai as it violates Article 13 and 19
of the Consltitution and violafive of the provisions of the Act.
He submitted that, right to trade is a f11ndamenta,{~’–.._right
guaranteed under Article 19(1){g) of the constituucm; % f”s~gie.h
fimdamental rights are subject tn restxictions, if V’
by law made under the provisions. ‘
Constitution of India. In this
Kamataka Shops and comme1A§;g;.,,.Est§h1{;nm¢h’§$”§._Acn $1961 -1’
(hereinafter referred to the jw.e.f.
29.8.1964 by repealing flie Establishments
Act, 1948, Hydcrahagl Act, 1951.
Madras Shops and Mysore Shops
and Estab}is}~1€111§i§£siA:_: intention to provide
uniform W1″or regulation of the terxns
and condéfigfls c:}fw,. employment in shops and
com1z1e:j::i:31lLAest’4z£ii2v3,Visi111ieIi.i:s. The then Government of Mysore
3″ by the Government of India
further submitted that, thereafter there
were sgveral aiijgmdments to the provisions 0f the Act. Hewever,
«.j:ic.ither they ééms and objects of the Act nor the provisions of the
afiigfifilafn any restricticn on the manner in which a trade to
on, except regulating the conditions af service of {he
V Efrmpioyees in the establishments.
-5 –
6. In this zegand, he referred to the provisions of the Act
interaiia submitting that, the Act deals with namely, Chaflie: II
deals with 1e@’strat:ien of establishments, Chapter
work of employees, Chapter IV — annual leayie’ K
Chapter V — Wages and compe§isetl6£:, u ”
Employment of Children anel ‘
Enforcement and Inspection. ,VIII.”-‘ ‘V
and Pmceclure and Chapte-aj_ IX to
these chapters and the he further
submitted that, ::_1.o12e;e_f as regard to the
manner in his product 1103: it
suggests 2 board should be in a
particular ml’ smllnserl ‘orél Ear language. He subnfitted
that, Rl”}i€’ 2.4-Auof tl_V1e’1Ru’V1es “being outside the scope of the Act
I1; he referred tn the delegation of
Section 40 of the Act to point out that,
the S$ta__te Cmserfiment is delegated with power to make rules
” subimfiifed that, Section 40 subsection (2) relates to
rules in respect of health and safety and Welfare of
h …:le’1n§loyees. Subsection (3) of Section 40 refers to penalty for
eentravention of the rules and subeection (4) of Section 40
requires the publication of the rules and Section 41 requires
1131523 to be laid before the State Legislamre. He further
submitted that, any mic that is made, must cany o1’i{“»ii.he
purpose of thtfi Act. He furthar i’efen’e€1 to
by the State Gii)V6I’fl}CIlE31’1t by K
December 1963 and submittefi
none of the rules suggest 0: *
establishment: to carry on hiéi-itradie iii ii}
mazmrsr or requires to display ‘ficardii
language. Refening to vaxiciiléy h¢:::’ii’i$i11§}é”:iit¢:»::i that, Rule
24-9; does not fitwiflzin of the objects of
this Act nor it the Act anti submitted
that, tha are ])}f'()V”.i{i€€’i to market their
precinct uncieréaiibfamil iiade name. Trade name being
“VODA§F§O?$ Engiish and ¥3e:iI1g registered as a
ai*;§;_ in $116 same will not only have an
iJ:i;1–9éie;t “E3i}3i:1¢ss but it may amount to infringament of
i {he }3AI’€%TifiSif3Il3i§::.t§16 Trade Marks Act. He submitted that, if
” msttticfing a trader fram fiispiaying the name car
in a manna’ he requires for the purpase of
..__'”a;g;1:§f;%iV§isement or far thz: grxirpage (if marketing, the State
Govamment by notification cannet flame a 11116, which may
have 311 affect cf violation cf provisions of Tradé Marks Act.
Even otherwise, Rule-24A of the Ruies is outside the of
the delegated 1cgisIati<:m. and is unco13stitufioz1.:;31§:V:Vit:4'o:"aa1st}
mfriuges the fundamental right guaranteeci
19(1)(g) of the Constitufion of india.
7. In support of his oontepiions. ho fefcnoog oleoision ;
mportcd in 1989 Vol. 3 KLJ 4:73 matter
as co. mus» STATE’ 01:’ this
Court had an occasion to purpose of the
Act aoé this observed that,
the Act is cnooofid. v._t:’:1j’;Vaev””–:oos:1’di1:io11s of work and
omp1oymont’iz¢–.%;}§o§;§é§id ofstablishments and other
incidcr:ta1v:i1;.a:fi;ox>s.v: bohind the icgisiation is socia}
interest in §.ioa1f_ h-__of._v£ho~*’LWorkers who form a substantial
.s.e§33e;:.’§;of flzeVcozé3i:£11:.,1;Jl_tyvand in whose welfare the community
~o:SS*::1iiz;}j3rA vitally interested. Ameiioration of the
cozidifions of”fiwori:”wou]d be the main reason for any measure
Lerovidifxg mgulation of the oontxaots of iabour. Act is
H 4.’o13{Iy’..en§r1oagod to provide safety and bcttzer work condifions and
V A oonéitions of the employees in the establishment. fife
to a éocision reported in 2002 Vol.2 KIJ 268 in the
” fiiattor of LAXMAN OMANNA BI-EAMANE -93- STATE or
KARNATAKA AND OTHERS and submitirod that, Ruie 24~A as it
f%/
was earlier, fell for considerntion before this Court 311;!”-._this
Ceurt has uphnkd the validity of the said. ruie. Refezjiaygi
said judgment, iearned Samar Counsel submitted flint V’
A as then it Was, was tested by thisv~Cm11*t Vi
Article 30 of the Constitution. As the ”
only on the ground that, ” ii
district forms a linguistic zninority Liinsistennc display
the heart} in Kannada ibg .:i’iV}’s2″t;icle 30 of the
Constitution oflndiagapd igmcles 29 and
30 of the tbgaitl’ does not in any
way displaying the name
boaxd of i.e., Maiathi along with
Kannada it is of Article 29 of the
vConstit’L;fi’on. of V’Refé:rring to the said decision, he furtfihcar
Rule WL54«A as it than was, was neither
q{:e;5itao:i¢dfZfm;’ of violation of fundamental mg’ ht
i nor was considered with regaxd to the
‘i ” ‘:irié’1egNa1ionvv:}i’ iegslative power under Section 40 of the Act and
A that, that said jndment: is per inqurium and fufither
Ewrsit petitixm having been filed against the amendment of
iifins brought in on 33.12.2008, the eariier decisicn will not
have any bearing on this case. He also referred to a decision
– 13 –
mporteci in AIR 1 99? SC 2502 in the matter of AGRICULTURAL
MARKET COMMf’I’TEE -us- SHALIMAR CHEMICAL afekgs
LIMITED and submitted that, the Apex Court
Rule 3 relating to 1:’/V3′ of fee by market commitfieefias K
that, rule of presunaption is bad in law? e£fee’€. V
to the policy of the Act and the Apex
rule. He submitted that, legisfieitaejéfij-i1.b1aie1.V. ao;m.%t;:1¢%’ee;§;51ic§% and
iegal friction cannot be cxeaged by”
8. He also submitteci of Trade
Marks Act onee_:h’e&;mark[Aor any change in
the said sign and prosecution. The
sign boafd_ n 3 has been registered as a
trade mark, «.e§}ear.1 a_ naade to it may amount to
4_ of .p;fg;visions of the Trade Marks Act. He
that, Trade Marks Act being legislated by the
of Entry 49 of the List—}., any law that
V sgvoulzifniae by the State Legisiatum either in pursuance of
}3£13ve14 t1nder List–2 car under the cencument list would be
under Article 254 9:’ the Constitufiou of India, if it
VT ccanttazy $0 the previsiens of leg’slai:ien made by
Farliaxnent in respect of subject matter in List-1 of Schedule VII
of the Constitutitm of India.
.11-
9. He aim refexred to another decision reported in
:2 sec 77 in the matter of STATE OF ”
OTHERS Mus» BASANT NAHATA and submitted ‘t.b_a.;}f,*;V1¢ig§s§:gu~v§’ A
policy must be in conformity with theI»Aco1:;._a:=.4£ii3;jufi§)Ii$_l’ifiia:;1x:§§;1f§:
if that is not so, the Court’s d¢c1a;auo5a_e1? the eV1eegi§:afion: A
unconstitutional cannot be oerio. of
inteztferenee with the ._ Iegislamm
shouid lay down the which the
deiegatee has to tlee and vague
delegation V. stéxtutelprovision as
unconsfitwjtiofiai…
10. He”V.sfihn§itfe&’..’Ath4et, 24-A being in violation of
_Art:io1eu and ofthe Constitution of India and being
eielegated “” “iegislafion is unconstitutional and
unenf:+rcéa&;:e.o
1″1 H0113, learned Advocate General submitted
‘once “1’:1:1e validity of an Act or the Rules is upheld, Court
“jurisdiction to 1″€-COI1Sid€I” the same once again. in this
‘” he also relied on the judment of this Court; in LAXMAN
‘ OMANINA BHAMANEE case (supra) and submitted that. Rule 24-
A as it was then, did pmvide for displaying the name beam! or
-4«.4Govemme;;tA1-to make rules.
Sig board of the establishment in Kannada language and this
Court having upheld the said Rule, the subsequent amvefittinent
is not amenable for questrioning before this Court. §’i”o’
his contention, he relied on a decision zeporteci _
8 in the matter of IZIELJ-II (mom AND M;’L§.s–
-~vs- SHAMBHU NATE MUKHERJI AN1i’o%i*HERs svuimjiteai’
that, when the Court has held Rake?-‘¥-A as’i:t_trt2e is not V
pennissible to raise the issiie pn difiereht gound
and submitted that it is easy as ‘ci§ts<3ever__i:'t'es§i.3.V'§g1fig3unds of attack
to sustain the _e11oi%¢eti to raise such
gonads once §A1[_»Ii§.§ 'a notification cannot
be strmckfl doyvtt to be placed before the
Legislatureiaztd' by vigil of the legislature.
113; -He .'Sut§'m1;tted that, Section 40 of the Act
I-V:.Ved:3feI*S%" tioiiéer "oz; thctvétéite Government to make rule to sub-
serve the Act, Anything that is incidental to the
t 0f . 'Etch the power is eonferreé on the State
Display sf Sim beard
«._§i;e'ds):mE:ii};'.anfly in Kannada language in the State 0f Kaxnataka
be said as outside the eeope of delegated legislative
_:uI§fG§¥6I' of the State Govemment,u:t1der Secfion 46 of the Act,
insofar as shops and establishments are concerned, the sign
.r:;:§,/
xi
9s*;»%/:
_ 33 _
board and the name board being incidental and the display of
name bean} in Kannada language cannot be called as emside
the scope of the delegated legjslafion. In this regard,
to a decision reported in (2003) 3 sec: 321 in
STJOHIVS TEACHERS TRAINING E\LST1¥Vef3’E”;Q.E.{}I<E1NA£,A A'
DIRECTOR, NATIONAL COUNCIL FORV T:é'gAti*H£*;e:
AND ANOYHER and submitted _to oufi1=whéther" V L'
any legisiation suffers flux}; excessi9e""deiegatios',' it_Ais_:§1ecessa1'y*
to consider the subject matter, -flie s§ihe1i1e':z:gxid the provisions of
the Act including pream'i3ie– circuxnstaslces
in the backgealisd 1' flse enacted. He also
submit£eci.VVv " sissays presume that the
suboxtiinaeg. virsfi and if the Court finds that
two const;:ucti§$ns_VVare, the construction which validates
'V 'the be To support his contention that there
évdseiiegafion of legislative pcwer nor Rule 24-9; is
on a decision nepsrteci in (1980) 1 .S'CfC 340
the s. of ms REGISTRAR op CO-OPERATIVE'
TRIVANDRUM A.-ND AN'O'IHER -vs- K.KUNJA.sMU
WERS and submitted that, the said case also pertains to
'V V _ .4 legislation and so-calw Henry VIII ciause and
submitted that the Apex Court on interpretation has ebsczveci
iae in eonsonanee with the purpose of the Act.
– ]4 ..
than Court must examine the preamble, the scheme and ether
available material to see if there axe any discernible gimjfielines
and further euhmitted that, too rigorous app}ication§;..ef as ‘
the provisions of the Act may itself occasiona71-fix V’
frustxating the very objects of the Aef i::.sa1_;e’e.d of
them. He further submitted that,
Tamil Nadu Government had 3 of
shops and estahlishmentg the board,
predominantly in Tamil rule has been
uphelé by the e A ‘e
13. 1:.e?:hese:§1’eeieidiie;’iea:ned Acivocate General
submittecf incidental to eany out the
purpose of tlie een_fe1fs”p<;:§€ver on the delegated Iegisiation to
– make te s.£113’=-sengev the intendment of the Act and
boaxti predominantly in Kannada language
the fundamental right to carry on the trade
nor it exeeeéiee of delegation or beyond the scope of deiegated
ff ‘ ‘ Iegie}a.:ipn. “‘
14-. Sri.Vijayaehankar, zeamee Senior Coimsel in reply
“-«efibieitted that, ineidentai cannot be independent, but it must
He also
/.
52;;
reiterated the provisions of the Act and submitted that. merely
because the rule is Iequired to he placed before the
legislation does not get vaiidated if it is beyond ‘
delegated 1e§’s3.afion. He alse sumrgesd’ :;rg§£,’ k A’
question was not the subject matter *
such, the writ petition cannot beT_;ejectedA’or .0-:1: the * L’
guund that the issue haebeen it” he
reiied on a judment mpeifed. 1520 and also
1991 Vol.4 sec 139 to sum; ‘ V:1;e_t_, rendenm
without a judgment in per
irzqunizm and earlier decision of this
Court deajit this Writ petition nor the
said decisie’1’:__didV of subordinate legislation
and as it fldt affeci the petitionefs case.
-‘ v A iii tLl:ie.;&1i,ght ef”i:A1§e cantenfions raised by the pa1’tne’ S.
the_ é§1;evs’ti<}ji»– for consideration is as under:
"'F_fi7Iteif;ef: 24-13 of the Kamataka Shops and
Establrehments Rules, 1963 is ultra virm
'A the cieiegaied Iegisiative power?"
16. To appreciate the contenfions ef the parties, it is
-fiecessaxy to look into the object, the scheme and intendment of
the legislature to enact the Kantzzataka Shoes and Commercial
– E5-
Estabiishmtznts Act, 1961. That: statement of objects and
reasons of the Ac: is to have a unjforxn law in the §_)__f
and emgioygent in Show and commemial b
Before the Ac: was promulgated,
enactments operating for difi”erVe»n_tfl for .h!£z;§<f1vi*as n
Madras Shops and Estabfishmeni:é;L'L».::5V:£.é:t1 and
for Mysore: area. Mysore 1948
was in force, for Hydemlzfid' Shops and
Establishments #195 Bombay ama,
Bombay Shops'; was in force. To
provide law, the leg'siat1,:re has
brought in jp1"es'ei)tV aim and object to provide for
_ the Iegxglation of cofiditiojéas of work and empioyment in shops
Preamble of the Act reastis as
n
A 'An Jprovide for the regulation of oonditians of
V wcrk ernplcrymeni in shops and <:9mmerm'a!
x T t-zsiaiéfishrnents.
WHEREAS it is eywedient to provide for the
r§éguIai2’on af conditions of work: and errzpfeytneni in
shops and commercial mtabiishments and ether
irzcidentai matters. ”
g ‘ §
– E? –
There are nine chapters in all. Chapter II deals with Iegistration
of establishments, Chapter III —- Hotlrs of Work of employees,
Chapter IV —- annual leave with wages, Chapter V – “am
compensation. Chapter VI — Employment of
Women, Chapter VII – Enforcement and inspec1:io;1,lv:A4(3ha’g;:i:fi?f._’lsillgf b
– Ofiences, Penalties and Proceéure
&isce11aneot1s. in Chapter-II, cmp_1oye:4*’oflcveIy
requixes to register his estabnshmexgrin terms c.£’R1fi; %3V–A by
submittiog Foam-A. Any chmage xegistratiofi is”vrequ11ed’
to be infozmed under the Inspector.
Section 6 deals wjmlglgsmg: o:’lé’stabiié1;;..vn¢n;1;;’ {o be informed to
the Inspe€:§or.__ with issue of appointment
orders. Chls;pt;er–Iil segisfiafion of establishments.
What is s.regisfiat_:lofi of employment could be gathered fmm
I3′(:t1l’l’.l.l)L-A pzovides for an application for
” estslalishment it requires the details of the
Z ost,ablis11me_;1’tl the name of the business, number of
” “‘e1liployecs,vv._oden, Women and young persons. Similarly, the
gasovisions relate to change in the establishment. closure
. _?esltabfishment anti appoinment order to be issued by the
einployer to the emgxloyees. Chapter-HI relates to providing
Iegulation of Worlcing hours of the employees prohibiting the
-}g-
ernpioyer making the empioyees to work more than nine hours
on any day any forty–eight he-urs in any week. It also regulates
the overtime Work. Section 8 deals with extra Wage:3i f9r
overtime Work; Secfion 9 deals with interval for rest. _
eieals with spreading of work. which should not ”
htmrs inclusive of intervai for rest.
zestriction on opening and C10SiI1g’i}€}£1I’S (if the esf::£e1’isI§fi1eI§;t £15 ,
no establishment shall be open.ed’V’VL’eaEriie_r or
closeci later than the time’ weekly
holidays. Sccfion 13 dealg 5%,}; selling of the
products (yutsidef closing hours.
Chapter-IVV *g1″an”£. 0f have with Wages, Wages
dtmn’ g leavcg xtief: advance ammmt. recovexy of
unpaid wages: e.._'{3I1a1;§te:;’.*’?_ deeds with wages and compensation.
..\§{age$;V.»;}:3,;1u§’.t’z10t be anything contained in Payment of
__ compensation under the Workmexfs
Chapter-VI deals with Iesiaiefion on
‘V VV e;;ap}oj?§B.g in the estabiishment, prohibiting women
.4 ” during the night hours. Chapter-VII deais
V ‘efljfemement and inspecfion conferring y-owe: on the
itxspeetor. (3hapter-VIII deals with penalties. Chapter-IX deals
3 {with misceiianeous as regard to maintenance of registers,
‘\
– 19 –
recorés and éispiay of notieee; delegation of yower; dismissal of
employees with notice and power to make rules.
17. Reading of these provisions of the ”
abundantiy clear that, the Act is intendeéeetoézegjuiefe ‘A u
conditions of an employee in the esmeiishfiieet
There is nothing to indicate that. 9§Vnef”0f the * L’
to regulate his trade in a pa;1icuiar_.e;{anne1j. If the,pro§is5ens of
the Act: read with conespofitfieg it clear that the
Act is intended to ‘_of.&V’e-.iI 1.pioyees in the
establishment se1″i§fic’e V’ provide service
conditione. ” to the consequence of
violaéon of 71:iie– Act. Section 30 deais with
penalties for vio’imj_io1}._C*–f fhejiiieovisions of Sections 4, 5, 6, 6~A,
‘:59, m,””:~1,:12e,A.33, k:s.1zs, 25 and 39 and also Sections 3, 1’7,
24,’ eg 29 §34.Lof.the Act. If ‘these provisions are 1001953 mm,
they.m§§ii1}y faiiuze to regetration, faiiuxe to inform the
engage establishment, failure to previrie for closing
to issue appoinmeni: order. faiiure to proviée for
Weekly hours, failure to pmvide for intexval for rest,
‘V ‘ A» uspeeeding the Work beyond twelve hours, not maintaining the
opening and closing hears, not providing weekly heiizzlays or
selling the articles outside the establishment after the clesing
-29-
hours, not graniring annual ieave, not granting wages during
leave period, empioying women and young person d11I’iI1gi Iz.i.ght
hours and not issuing notice before order of ref’
employee. Haxmonious reading of the provisi0nf.3nf-..:t.JheeA_T}5;et _
penalty in contravenfion of the ‘of
suggests that, Act is intended _safegnnnr;i the :i:_;ter’e:’3tV ef’
empioyee and protect hill} finm e§{;3i6itafion”?2_§* efigfiieyer by V’
taking overtime work withnnt pi*6iIic§.i12g””1§{ages’g ‘ 1’1ot” provi:ding
Safety’, not granting ilolidajylrs’; if the rules
framed are also _cg the leave with wages
register in 9 deals with not providing
V leave Wages of ‘:’;he persons employed. Rule 1′? deals
noigumcienuy lighted. Ruk 13 deals with
stairs for a building of more than one
floorAi’n__te1fns.gefAthe said ruie. Rule 19 relates to proviading an
” -ezéiteml e:a1rs*. ;’ to open finm inside the establishment Rule 20
V’ gsreeautzion against fire-; not keeping certificate of each
employees; not maintaining the reg’ste:rs, zeeortls and
nude: Rule 24, netmaintaining the rem’ste1*s and records and
dispiay of nonoes. Ali these rules relate to employment of an
.. ..
the Act and would be unconstitutional. May be, displaying the
name board in Kamzada language is vexy laudable, but if such
resfiicfian is imposed without having any source of pov§;’er,r’sjuch
act would be iiiega}. In case of exercise of poWe_1_’;”t§’f
legislation, it must: flow from the delegation of
the provisions of the Act Section
power, which reads as under: « ‘ dd . V
“40. Power to make S’mté”{I%evé}vnneeni
may be nott’j1’oati<}zj:, make… to 91:51 the
purposes of this Ace ._ VA V
(2) In particular gaimz Lgrejudice :9 the
generality f’!he fo;*égaing pefizzer, rules made under
sub-section ‘;'”£.}_Te’nay_ pr._’ozride~.iri .resp_efc£ of the health
and saJ%fveweW*e Of *”‘?’~P3j°?!’==?8-
A :3) In’rrio:.£:i2:g1″iu_£és ‘under this section the Siate
Goverrmreni .pre~z;ide~”that {:2 centraveniion of any
mie be pzgnxehabie with afine which may extend
to ten rupees.
V , {‘4_).??1e’V33bwer to make ruies conferred by this
. seetimf1,§’s’–..eubjed to the condition of the rules being
V _ ‘ima_de ajierhpzrevious publicatien. ”
V dd . The fienereld pdirver conferred on the State to make rules to earxy
en! the pufposes of the Act Even assuming that the yower is
to make rules in respect of matters incidental to the
‘V of the Act, the ineidemai to the purpose of the Act must
” Vhe in consonanee with the object of the Act.
-33-
18. It is well settled law that, the rules framed under the
provisions cf the statute form part of the statute. I1;aT’0t.her
worcis, rules have statutory force, but before 1113 rule.
the cifect of statutory provision, two conditions K V’
v’iz., (i) it must conform to the pmvisioné’ of. the -:s’e.a’ f:ut§:._ifiieief
which it is flamed and (ii) it must __c¥31fie then
and purview of the rule making I1″—¢;ith$::” _: two V’
canditions is not the r;1ié’s”5Wo*u1d:bc void.
This propasition is reiteratc-;£:iV% 6 in the matter
of GENERAL AND ANOTI-[ER M
123- DR. SUB}£}§1SI{“§?I§i&i’§}_T:)f€;4§V:Y}i’£)A”??I§{?D_ ;–‘1NOT¥–IER.
19. 9″I*_1;u%; Apex Excision reported in (2004) 8 soc
74?’ in the 11ia–t£ei’* -7.’DR.,;ia7QHAc;£wDRA PRASAD SINGH wus-
~ .’F?gf£AIéV’L1E’!}ISLA1’YVE cowvca, AND omms while
.v.v§?it1;V’~:1§e.’g9;uboIdinate Ecgislafion at para–I3 has observeé
as 1i:1d’eI’:
“‘I3. ‘.,, , . . The mics being delegated legislation are
A to certain mI factors. Urzderfying the
x. ‘ ‘agncept of delegated Iegéslaiion :3 the basic pnhciple
* the legislature defegates because if cannot
–V ctireciiy exert its wr’II in every detail. AH it can in
3 practice do 1% to lay down the outline. This means ihai
the intention of the Iegaisiature, as indicated in the
outiine (that is the enabling Act), must be the prime
guide to the meaning of delegated iegislazién and the
extent of the power to make it. The true extent of the
power gaverns the Iegal meaning of the delegated
.34-
legislation T113 deieaate is not intended to travel
wider than the object cf the legislature. f(‘he detegatefs
fimction is to serve and promote that object, while zitt”,
aH’thnes rewnafimbyg hm”; &>it ffiza is the rub3<Qf 'g
primary intention. Power delegated by an enc::;'1me1itL- 3
does not enable the ctuthoriiy by regulations tc: 1gaxtér24:i'— '7' '
the scope or general operation of the enax:m1em_bu[I'»z's'
stricify wzcillary. It mil! authoflfifib {he _pi"bt}ision""Qf'.V
subsidiary means of carrying finio"'e;§}'e<:i .; is"* 1
enaded in the statute itself ur§i'IT ..-aové-2;: what " 5%
incidental to the execution of its spe§x'j"§¢ provis_z'on~. "
such a power will not supgiofl atIemp_{§__ to :£3iden_ the}
flurnoses of the Act, to add diffe'reni'vméms' 'of
carrzginq them our or to cieparffrom or va:v:1;'its ends.
The qformaid prirzcipfe will with greater rigour
where rules have b€eri — 1r:.V_e3_cérc:7se of power
oorjerred by a oonstiirziioruaf. F50 rules can
be fiarned which hav3.._thé'–3jffaci;V of 4.:-'nlarging or
restricting the_a9,nten_:'t arnpffiucie ':f.\f the relevant
oon.stfiutions._i:I " -the rules shauid
be inte1p_re'£.éd_ de_n£§:isie?a§ i£{ith–..thé: aforesaid principle. "
V " . ;§4gid,§§rEini'ng by me)
Thus, thé"~d¢cisVi¢=n e_f Apex Court it is clear that the
'VéieZcgavf§§:"}1£;sV:13.c) po\$zEr'%—-Widen the purpose of the Act or to add
11¢;-a" jneans. The Apex Court in another decision
I'ep<§i:fcf:€i i11 A§R_'.'V3.3VUV00 SC 1059 in the matter of KUNJ Beramzl
£4A;L Boviyarpaisri) OTHERS "~vS- STATE 05' HP. AND omm-'es has
tflat. for caxzrym 9; out the purpose of the Act, the Stata
in exercise of delegated power cannot bring Within
' A» '"ifi§§§t=:t of the mks What has been exciuded by the Act itself.
1,
.. 2§ ..
20. Object of the: Act was considered by this Couxt in the
matter of M/s.m1LLIP0s & Co. (supra) at para-23 a31»*;1:.”‘*3′.f£. is
reiterated that, the Act pmvicies for rczgulating the
work and emfsleyment in the shops K V’
estabfishmtants and the rationale b€:hirv;tdmVtlié;«
interest in the health of the workers.»A:4\sf]5;t;+.V_
segment 0f the community and
is essentially and vifally i:1v1.?:?tf§este<}.v.""' ''~ :
21. In simiiar Court in the
matter of BASAIYT’ considered the
power of dbsewed as under:
“I9.”-_The_ T’iIfLé._.IegisIature’s delegating its
powere3_ in jIa_v¢3a;i’ _of tir.e executive is a part of
iegislaiiz;-ef¢anczio1L.. ms a constituent element of ihe
Iegisfative pqwef 4:23″ a whole under Ariicle 245 of the
._”C§1fIn,siitz;tior:. «Sum delegation of power, however,
. V Vébszrzizbt V323 wide, unottmalised or unguided. The
!egis_Itt.ft.tre”tahi?e delegating such power is required to
-yfay §i’1gv~a’*iter”fa or standard so as to enabfe the
zieiegatéfe 19 act within the framework of the statute.
pfimipie on whim’: the power of the legislature is
:2,» .I;€gexerc:’sed is required to be disclosed It is case
mat esseniial legislative fi1nc.fions cammt be
” ‘ delegated.”
22. In the light of the ebsaxvation made by the Apex Court
mgani to the deisgatcd iegislaéon under Section 40 of the
Act, it provfies c1car–cut criteria for making the rules. Said
,:(~..’i, i
W26fi
p¥’0’J”iSi{)11 dues not Shaw that the State Geveznment in the
capacity of suboxtiinatc iegisslafion Couid make rule :ii’.§i’.[ the
matter, which is not avail provided under tha
outside €116 scoge of thfi same.
23. Clgnstzitutiori provides for ufie o’f ia;;i§;’31€$~.’;g£:V._.:i”€:rV
purpose’ Article 343 of the C0jns’a’tii’£i<5:1.. c1§a3}§.".é_€;$fith'
language: 0f the Union, Hindi sc1"é§t.'7j'st2iVVted as
official mnguage, however, fiéxiad of' V13 géears from
the commencement of the languagts; was
continued as ij'i}ni(::11. Power is
conferred "xEI’_l’V~’1,’:V§;’lc3 asV_LVt;h§§”§afigL1age for oflicial purpose. in
€)3.”d€I’ to ma};<'::–.. as official lauguage of the State
.. .1J1A;t1§::1j»'2"%xrt":i;x;fIc 345V,,"tE;e____Lcgis}gature of the State has to isgisiate
'E"§1t,: ilétw fe:v'_vfiz€:' purpose.
C}f.fi€;§ia{T:'Ianguag¢ is not ciefined unéer Article 366 of
iii}? Cxgnsfiiggfifin of India, hcrwever, the Wcmii "officiai" in
égnse meaas, "gersen who holds an ofiice: of or
is officia} by arm emplayed ix}. acme public ca§)acity."
' alga means, gsublic e:3fi}ce1~ ia reiatimix to the dufifis of 111»:
office. Cionstimtion itself has 119": envisaged or confezzrezi any
-33-
the Constitution is not subjected 10 any restrictions,
Any sectian of the citizens @ a right to have a
distinct language, scrrspt or cufture of its awn
irrespective of the fact whether that secticrn is
mirwrity or a major:’£g,: and is entitled to conservev
said right, Rule 24-A f the Rules provides f}’§.g,i’ .tVize%, ”
name board shaii be in Kannada: and whenevaégr dihfi. –‘~’ ”
languages are also used, the vemion in such czihef ”
languages ska?! be beiow the Karmadar. vers2’cn;”…F?9m.–A
this it is seen the said rule tioékrzot gin _rzny’ wa3;..} .&
prevent the petiiionerfrom dispirzying. #123 izan1e’boar*d__ :, A
of his shop in his language :’.e.,”.Mc;rcithi cifor2g.wit?;:_”~.. V’
Kannada If that is so, if cpannehbé sczi(7;*”1€?’;;:zi’_ the’;
pezizioner has in any way”-Egeen “prevent”-3d”~–:’ffbm’
conserving Maraihi language he is-:1,Iso’a1I£)u:eci
to use Marathi I aicfngg wifh. K
Thus, it is clear that the ru1¢_ Wahg ¢§1__i駧¥:§.c513},§(i».:£)Vn’-V*the gonad that
Maxatili 1ang1:ag::*’ib::;a;f-3 a terms of Articles
29 and of of ifidia. This Court has mat
Considered’Ai;hVe”issucfis§.L:Vi:}’ivfiéihér the rule: is ulira Hires as it is
hey-:>1::.d_i”1;:e &§iiegatcé” iégiélfifive power. Further the said
‘vgémvisiéfi i3″*310i’Z.S11béfiffiféd by the pmsent Rule 24% impugned
iii ” by notrificafion dated 31.12.2008. Even
_ – oti1ei*s:2j§§€ a1§§<:{,': said juégment will not in any way affect the
. ~'.__.44§}t3§:;ifi0fler's"}fiight 1:9 qucsfion tha valiéity of netification. In this
is 'L1$€2fll1 ts Kfftil' the Qbservation of the flgex Gear: in
ijizatter of STATE 01:' 5119. AND ANOTHER -z:s~ SYNTFIlz?'I'IC3S
%% ' _ ";AA.«'§9"p CHEMICALS LTD, AND £§N{)THER reported in 199114; 306
' 9: 9 1
13
y-
dec£sz’on is binding not because 0}’ its oonciusiens bzgt in
regard to its ratio and pfinapies, laid dawn 1h6?’€fR’. ,_A–!fty
declaration or cxmciusion mriyed witlwut appIic:iitiofi;.Vbf’
mind or preceded without any reason cxmmrrt
to be ¢:.Eec:Iara£z’orz of Iaw er authority of a gesiéral .:”2s:1?2;cr_e*'” : ‘
binding as 61 precedent Restrainf in H;ii$:é;ent:£irag or ”
cwerruiing is for sake of stabi£z’ty.__¢:e’nd.’ urizfz3?ftr1ii y._i2uI’._V
rigidity beyond reasonable iimitsv is inirisiotzl 11:) ‘th;_e’ ffs”.QiiiifL ‘
aflaw.” ‘
31. Leanzad Advocate
juégmeni in the matter of T TRAINING
INSWTUTE’ (supra) inferaéifiii*s1;b«:;11i§_§:§i;;§g–V.iiE3;;§t; giach rule has to be
presumed as inzffa vir¢s_ oprzn for two
constxuctions, has to be adoimad.
Hawcver, it Vlcarned Senior Counsel
for the .p_a*:;#§gi?ailit3I of two C0}1S12I’l1<:ti{:1I1S.
The pfinéipal rule itseif is ultra vires and
delegamd _leg';.§ia:1v:iAo11."'ha:$'; be oonshiared taking into account
t'r:e¢ f:z1Eai§%:Ié,.._subjé§f"Ai11attcr, scheme and pmvisions of the
* " cannot be two opinion 031 this. Even.
CGI2§%;§g1v6I’i£],§.§ .§}é:i.a’$AVV.§I’€3II1E}}_£i, subject matter, object, preévisicns cxf
the stafufié and the scheme as obsexvcd above, there is no
V’ to cgnstrue tiw mic as shira vires. The éecisian ciied
-. b:.r* %th@ Iearned Advocate General in the case ef K,K{L7VfJABMU
{suprt2£) 3.130 reiterates the same View 31.28., the provision is a near
Henry VII: ciause and it has to be examined based on preambie,
the scheme and other available matsrial to see as tc§»:”W[1.1etl1er
there are any discemible gllidefinas. This
that, in order is find out the extent of
purpose 0f the Act, preamble and thejirG:risi§)ns;v«é>f}ch:;Vgfici’ vit1;Li;z.s1;b 7,
be considersd. It is not necessary}?
othexwise, but. even if the prdfiifiiéns
main grammatical ‘fi€3″”A-poésibiiity of
constructing them as z”nt}*a ;:frésL,_v ‘zmd R1116 26 of the
Rules ixxssofar as of Rule 2441 of
the Rules is
3:; __I_;;$0faf the matter of SHAMBHU
NA??? ‘issue which has been decideé
eariier cfifinfit V .aga:£:1 on diffemnt grmmd is
concergxieci, the skarliéf defirisiezl is not sought to be rmpened nor
AV iihzz. vefé;*_1iei”‘ t;ie§:is;i0:1 had d6:a}tWit}:1 the same notificatiori. Even
Aa€.}i&1:=2?iS:::v,VV”’if ” ~”ci€:cisi0:1 is rendared witheut reference to
C£3I1$1Zi§§11f.i§}I1£’3ii.:}}fi’OViSiGflS or the statutory” provisions, the said
3″-‘««.’_£€:ecisie311″:%s5__that binding. In my view, the earlier {iecisien does
i1£§At’?;a_i§%; away the pefifie31:a.er’s right to qu-zzsticrzi the 11ei:«t’1’iica::ic:1z,,
K bad givsn fzwesh causa of actin.
33, Just because the ruies “firmed by the Stats
Govanxmanf and are rrzquired ta he piaced brsfx;-«re the lggésiature,
thfiffi is :13 rule that piacing hefc-re the iegislature would make
the rule as infra vfrrsas,
34. in ‘aha light of tbs above diSC{1SSi0j€l, «9nl3¥*’:}§:5s-hxiftzjiision
that can be arztived is that Rule 2-¢§–A 0f tft:1:::*’-‘.4′:}f’€21VE::’«[$2′ 4_
penalty under Rule 26 for violationof Rule ziiréfi’ T x
and are beyond the deiegated iegisla::i;iv:2::’:{3{§\i§?e1;[ 7I
Hence, Writ Petition c1.r:éc:1’v:’Lé::’;*s:..Abto bé a.l1oi’i§cfi_, I
make the following order:
(2′) Writ Pe£ition(;f§0ié?e;i::v
(ii) RuvIe. 2*,4_-A f»i~3’tf:z’:’§_etg,VrV’ Rafe 25 of the
l:?.a’;’£(:2iV’V(:r'{)??”£I3′?,tE?3′”CTl’£11 Estabfishrnents
as improsing penalty for violaticn
I:?u1e.v;24:i.fi the Rules is conoemed, declared as
..u}irc:¥ ‘V
issued by respondent N034 and 5 dated
A. f.:2£?09 at Annexuresfl a:n.d D are quashed.
Sd/-P
Iudge
KN}-«Q’-