{"id":29173,"date":"2009-06-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-06-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009"},"modified":"2015-12-21T18:48:48","modified_gmt":"2015-12-21T13:18:48","slug":"vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009","title":{"rendered":"Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: Subhash B.Adi<\/div>\n
IN THE HI(}H COURT 0?' IIQEQNATAKA M BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 5 TH DAY 01:' fem: 2009\nBEFORE  \nTHE HON'IE3LE MRJUSTICE SUBHASH B'.:\u00e9'x{,7\"r.i_A' \"\nwan' PETITIOK xo.19o1(2w9 'V ' If V' T} %\nBETWEEN:   .     L'\nVODAFONE ESSAR SOUTH um.\nPrestige Biue Chip \" \nGround Floor, Block I\n\nNo.9, Hessur Road\nBanga1orc~56O 029.\n\nRepnessnted by its Head ---       \nShri Sanjit Nezmsh   V v _   .'.\"\"\u00a7?E'FITIGNER\n\n(By S\ufb01.Vijayashai11\u00a3\u00e9u;_, VVsr%,'A:a\u00a7; ft;1f-_VV_.\n\nM] s.Guj-rura}  Agata}, 'Adv3}) _\nAND: V \" V V  V' \"\n\n1. The State\ufb01ii  \n\nRe;:=re'sentcd by  Chief Secretary\n ggudha  ..... .. v\n\n '  \u00abagagaloxeesap 001.\n\n2}' .'I\"}3L;: Staiepf Kaihataka\nRepteseni\ufb01d by its Secretary\nBe}')ax't:t1'cI1t*\" of Labour\nM. S. Bu\ufb02ding, Dr. B. R.Ambedkar Veedhi\n\n  AAB;6{) 001.\n\n  '?hc,i..abour Commissioner\n\n Bhavan, Bannerghatta Road\n\n  .. ___\u00a73a11gaIore--56O O29.\n\n  -.  The Senior Labour Inspector\n\n3'& Circle,  & Bhavana, Bannerghatta Road\nBangalore.\n\n\"N\n'mow \/\n\n\n\n5. The Senier Labour inspector\n23\"' Cimle, Karmika Bhavana\nBannsrghatta Road\nBangalore.\n\n(By Stiudaya Bella, Advocate General).  \n\nThis Writ Petition is \ufb01aea tmcier  226 3; 2.22:?  .\n\n.. Rp:sPC>4i~'\u00e9\"D:3:i\u00a7'\u00a74.\u00e9.#:;  ff\"  : A\n\nConstim\ufb01on of india praying to aicclaxt ti1cVprov;si\u00e9n}.'2.._9f Rlules  v\n\n2445 and 26 cf the Katnataky-3V--S}1ops'.. 'and \nEstab\ufb01shments Ruins, 1963 and *t11c   Shops 8:.\nOommercial Establishments.z(Am\u00a231\u20acim\u00a2nt)'\"\u00bbR111es,  am void\nand unconstitutional as Vic_.)_1a*.ing_ A3\u00a7tic1e._ 'land 19(1)(a) of the\nConstitution of India so far the_T.peti1i\u00e9)1&er_is._c:~:}Iiccrned, etc.,.\n\nThis Pei:iti<;m\ufb01  havizzg\u00e9    reserved on\n1 1 .3.2{)(}9 and coi111irggV-oz: for fk\ufb01no\ufb01nc\u00e9meni' of Orders this day,\n\nthe Court reaadggtblc __f\u00e9:11zigvi:1\u00abg_;--\n\n. . ' . ..    D  \n\nPe\ufb01\ufb01on\u00e9f "g;\u00a7:e<.:]arzat:ion, declaring that. the\n\nprovisions of ER-u 1ev  of the Kaxnataka Shops and\n\n" Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to\n   the Karnataka Shops and Commercial\n\nV  V(%s'9Li;1end\u00a3uent) Rules, 2008 (hereinafter refermd\n\n ' ':9 as '1'g'4\u00a5u1e;.25i\u20acxv.xc'i:L.(;1xnent Rules') are void and uncaenstitutionai as\n : i\ufb01c;-ilaiivrrf.'Ao{A1*ti<:1c 13 and 19 sub-m\ufb01cxe (1) clause (a) of the\n of In\u00e9ia insofar as the petitioner is concerned and\n\nT for quashing Rule 2445 an\ufb01 26 of the Rules and the\n\nRmendment Rules and consequentiy also for quashing the\n\nW\n\nM!"\n\n\n\nnotices issued by respondent Nose and 5 dated 6.1.2-Q09<\/pre>\n
produced at Annexures-C and D.\n<\/p>\n
2. Petitioner is a Company  VV  _
\npmvisions of the Companies Act and
\nthe Department of Teieeexsjmeniee\ufb01e\ufb01s. n
\nCommunications, Government of to ‘  ‘
\nmebile telephene sexvices {he
\nPetitioner renders its    name of
\n“Vodafone” in about  In order to
\nmake the  Elempany available to the
\nconsumers’    dealers, distributors,
\noutlets,    on the trade nagree by<\/p>\n
seihng SIM teisted commodities, petitioner has<\/p>\n
‘e~peIi\u20ac5:’:s_4i:E?lS  stores  Where it is rendering service to the<\/p>\n
Ve’t1stei\ufb01ers;~._V Esee “store displays the hade name “VODAFONE”<\/p>\n
   in \ufb01ttsnfef si1e\u00a71f sieie. Te carry on the business in accordance<\/p>\n
   had applied for grant of licence under the<\/p>\n
  egfexiisiezggs 5:” the Act and Ruies made thereunder. Petitioner<\/p>\n
  eeiaining the licence has opened severe} outlets, stores,<\/p>\n
“‘\u00abriis\ufb01ibu\ufb01en centres displaying its trade name or brand name as<\/p>\n
‘4 4V(}DAFONE” in front of its outiets by speeding nearly about 6<\/p>\n
.2 K<\/p>\n
.9\u00bb<\/p>\n
(more rupees.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
3. The State Government by noti\ufb01cation dated 31.’
\namended the Rules by substituting Rule 24-A
\nfor exhibition of name board and maiiing it
\nestabiishment to show the name
\nmore pxedominantly by jpmviding _more seace
\nlanguage and by amending R111\u00a7–.e.’\/\u00e9\ufb01, previded\u00bb  for
\ncontravention. Within 1v:b’..g1’ayg* <$i'"   'tile Labour
\nCommissioner fo::wardeei VA    to various
\ndepartments    same within two
\ndays Without\u00a7'e\ufb01e\u00a7_  :l!;1:a pursuance of the same,
\nSenior Lab"0u2+.   as per Annexures-C and
\nD '=.upo:n  'ten ehow cause as to why action<\/p>\n
should not   to Show the name board or a<\/p>\n
  pre\u00e9oeiieag\ufb01iy in Kannada language.\n<\/p>\n
V   ‘..4″pe::Vt:i1f.io\ufb01.er – Company being aggrieved by the<\/p>\n
noaacamg .  Ruie 24-A and 26 of the Rules and<\/p>\n
  ‘cpnseque\ufb01t\u00e9ai netices has filed this Writ Petition.<\/p>\n
VA   *   On behalf of the petitioner, Sn’.Vijayashankar, learned<\/p>\n
  Couzztsel submitted that, Rule 24–~A of the Rules is ultra<\/p>\n
  .. ; m’res and unconstittittitmai as it violates Article 13 and 19<\/p>\n
of the Consltitution and viola\ufb01ve of the provisions of the Act.<\/p>\n
He submitted that, right to trade is a f11ndamenta,{~’–.._right
\nguaranteed under Article 19(1){g) of the constituucm; % f”s~gie.h<\/p>\n
\ufb01mdamental rights are subject tn restxictions, if  V’
\nby law made under the provisions. ‘
\nConstitution of India. In this
\nKamataka Shops and comme1A\u00a7;g;.,,.Est\u00a7h1{;nm\u00a2h’\u00a7$”\u00a7._Acn $1961 -1’
\n(hereinafter referred to  the    jw.e.f.\n<\/p>\n
29.8.1964 by repealing \ufb02ie Establishments
\nAct, 1948, Hydcrahagl    Act, 1951.\n<\/p>\n
Madras Shops   and Mysore Shops
\nand Estab}is}~1\u20ac111\u00a7i\u00a7\u00a3siA:_:   intention to provide
\nuniform    W1″or regulation of the terxns
\nand cond\u00e9\ufb01g\ufb02s c:}fw,. employment in shops and<\/p>\n
com1z1e:j::i:31lLAest’4z\u00a3ii2v3,Visi111ieIi.i:s.  The then Government of Mysore<\/p>\n
 3″  by the Government of India<\/p>\n
 further submitted that, thereafter there<\/p>\n
  were sgveral aiijgmdments to the provisions 0f the Act. Hewever,<\/p>\n
 \u00ab.j:ic.ither they \u00e9\u00e9ms and objects of the Act nor the provisions of the<\/p>\n
  a\ufb01ig\ufb01\ufb01lafn any restricticn on the manner in which a trade to<\/p>\n
   on, except regulating the conditions af service of {he<\/p>\n
V   Efrmpioyees in the establishments.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
-5 –\n<\/p>\n
6. In this zegand, he referred to the provisions of the Act
\ninteraiia submitting that, the Act deals with namely, Chaflie: II
\ndeals with 1e@’strat:ien of establishments, Chapter
\nwork of employees, Chapter IV — annual leayie’ K
\nChapter V — Wages and compe\u00a7isetl6\u00a3:, u ”
\nEmployment of Children anel   ‘
\nEnforcement and Inspection. ,VIII.”-‘ ‘V
\nand Pmceclure and Chapte-aj_ IX   to
\nthese chapters and the   he further
\nsubmitted that, ::_1.o12e;e_f  as regard to the
\nmanner in    his product 1103: it
\nsuggests   2  board should be in a<\/p>\n
particular ml’ smllnserl ‘or\u00e9l    Ear language. He subn\ufb01tted<\/p>\n
that, Rl”}i\u20ac’ 2.4-Auof tl_V1e’1Ru’V1es “being outside the scope of the Act<\/p>\n
  I1;  he referred tn the delegation of<\/p>\n
  Section 40 of the Act to point out that,<\/p>\n
  the S$ta__te Cmser\ufb01ment is delegated with power to make rules<\/p>\n
”  subim\ufb01ifed that, Section 40 subsection (2) relates to<\/p>\n
  rules in respect of health and safety and Welfare of<\/p>\n
h  …:le’1n\u00a7loyees. Subsection (3) of Section 40 refers to penalty for<\/p>\n
  eentravention of the rules and subeection (4) of Section 40<\/p>\n
requires the publication of the rules and Section 41 requires<\/p>\n
1131523 to be laid before the State Legislamre. He further<\/p>\n
submitted that, any mic that is made, must cany o1’i{“\u00bbii.he<\/p>\n
purpose of thtfi Act. He furthar i’efen’e\u20ac1 to
\nby the State Gii)V6I’\ufb02}CIlE31’1t by  K
\nDecember 1963 and submitte\ufb01
\nnone of the rules suggest 0:   * <\/p>\n
establishment: to carry on hi\u00e9i-itradie  iii ii} <\/p>\n
mazmrsr or requires to display ‘\ufb01cardii
\nlanguage. Refening to vaxiciil\u00e9y h\u00a2:::’ii’i$i11\u00a7}\u00e9”:iit\u00a2:\u00bb::i that, Rule
\n24-9; does not \ufb01twi\ufb02zin of the objects of
\nthis Act nor it   the Act anti submitted
\nthat, tha  are ])}f'()V”.i{i\u20ac\u20ac’i to market their<\/p>\n
precinct uncier\u00e9aiibfamil iiade name. Trade name being<\/p>\n
“VODA\u00a7F\u00a7O?$   Engiish and \u00a53e:iI1g registered as a<\/p>\n
  ai*;\u00a7;_  in $116 same will not only have an<\/p>\n
iJ:i;1–9\u00e9ie;t  “E3i}3i:1\u00a2ss but it may amount to infringament of<\/p>\n
i   {he }3AI’\u20ac%TifiSif3Il3i\u00a7::.t\u00a716 Trade Marks Act. He submitted that, if
\n”    mstttic\ufb01ng a trader fram \ufb01ispiaying the name car
\n   in a manna’ he requires for the purpase of
\n ..__'”a;g;1:\u00a7f;%iV\u00a7isement or far thz: grxirpage (if marketing, the State<\/p>\n
  Govamment by noti\ufb01cation cannet \ufb02ame a 11116, which may<\/p>\n
have 311 affect cf violation cf provisions of Trad\u00e9 Marks Act.<\/p>\n
Even otherwise, Rule-24A of the Ruies is outside the  of<\/p>\n
the delegated 1cgisIati<:m. and is unco13stitu\ufb01oz1.:;31\u00a7:V:Vit:4'o:"aa1st}<\/p>\n
mfriuges the fundamental right guaranteeci   <\/p>\n
19(1)(g) of the Constitu\ufb01on of india.\n<\/p>\n
7. In support of his oontepiions. ho fefcnoog oleoision  ;<\/p>\n
\nmportcd in 1989 Vol. 3 KLJ 4:73  matter
\nas co. mus\u00bb STATE’ 01:’   this
\nCourt had an occasion to   purpose of the
\nAct ao\u00e9 this    observed that,
\nthe Act is cnooo\ufb01d.  v._t:’:1j’;Vaev””–:oos:1’di1:io11s of work and
\nomp1oymont’iz\u00a2–.%;}\u00a7o\u00a7;\u00a7\u00e9\u00a7id  ofstablishments and other
\nincidcr:ta1v:i1;.a:\ufb01;ox>s.v: bohind the icgisiation is socia}<\/p>\n
interest in \u00a7.ioa1f_ h-__of._v\u00a3ho~*’LWorkers who form a substantial<\/p>\n
.s.e\u00a733e;:.’\u00a7;of \ufb02zeVcoz\u00e93i:\u00a311:.,1;Jl_tyvand in whose welfare the community<\/p>\n
 ~o:SS*::1iiz;}j3rA  vitally interested. Ameiioration of the<\/p>\n
cozidi\ufb01ons of”\ufb01wori:”wou]d be the main reason for any measure<\/p>\n
 Lerovidifxg   mgulation of the oontxaots of iabour. Act is
\nH 4.’o13{Iy’..en\u00a7r1oagod to provide safety and bcttzer work condi\ufb01ons and
\nV A  oon\u00e9itions of the employees in the establishment. fife
\n  to a \u00e9ocision reported in 2002 Vol.2 KIJ 268 in the<\/p>\n
 ” \ufb01iattor of LAXMAN OMANNA BI-EAMANE -93- STATE or<\/p>\n
KARNATAKA AND OTHERS and submitirod that, Ruie 24~A as it<\/p>\n
f%\/<\/p>\n
was earlier, fell for considerntion before this Court 311;!”-._this<\/p>\n
Ceurt has uphnkd the validity of the said. ruie. Refezjiaygi <\/p>\n
said judgment, iearned Samar Counsel submitted \ufb02int  V’<\/p>\n
A as then it Was, was tested by thisv~Cm11*t  Vi<\/p>\n
Article 30 of the Constitution. As the  ”\n<\/p>\n
only on the ground that,   ” ii<\/p>\n
district forms a linguistic zninority  Liinsistennc  display
\nthe heart} in Kannada  ibg .:i’iV}’s2″t;icle 30 of the
\nConstitution oflndiagapd  igmcles 29 and
\n30 of the  tbgaitl’  does not in any
\nway  displaying the name
\nboaxd of   i.e., Maiathi along with<\/p>\n
Kannada  it is   of Article 29 of the<\/p>\n
vConstit’L;\ufb01’on. of  V’Ref\u00e9:rring to the said decision, he furt\ufb01hcar<\/p>\n
  Rule WL54\u00abA as it than was, was neither<\/p>\n
q{:e;5itao:i\u00a2dfZfm;’  of violation of fundamental mg’ ht<\/p>\n
i   nor was considered with regaxd to the<\/p>\n
‘i ” ‘:iri\u00e9’1egNa1ionvv:}i’ iegslative power under Section 40 of the Act and<\/p>\n
A  that, that said jndment: is per inqurium and fu\ufb01ther<\/p>\n
  Ewrsit petitixm having been \ufb01led against the amendment of<\/p>\n
  ii\ufb01ns brought in on 33.12.2008, the eariier decisicn will not<\/p>\n
have any bearing on this case. He also referred to a decision<\/p>\n
– 13 –\n<\/p>\n
mporteci in AIR 1 99? SC 2502 in the matter of AGRICULTURAL
\nMARKET COMMf’I’TEE -us- SHALIMAR CHEMICAL afekgs
\nLIMITED and submitted that, the Apex Court
\nRule 3 relating to 1:’\/V3′ of fee by market commit\ufb01eefias K
\nthat, rule of presunaption is bad in law?     e\u00a3fee’\u20ac. V
\nto the policy of the Act and the Apex
\nrule. He submitted that, legis\ufb01eitaej\u00e9\ufb01j-i1.b1aie1.V. ao;m.%t;:1\u00a2%’ee;\u00a7;51ic\u00a7% and
\niegal friction cannot be cxeaged by”\n<\/p>\n
8. He also submitteci   of Trade<\/p>\n
Marks Act onee_:h’e&;mark[Aor any change in<\/p>\n
the said sign   and prosecution. The
\nsign boafd_   n 3 has been registered as a<\/p>\n
trade mark, \u00ab.e\u00a7}ear.1  a_  naade to it may amount to<\/p>\n
4_ of  .p;fg;visions of the Trade Marks Act. He<\/p>\n
  that, Trade Marks Act being legislated by the<\/p>\n
  of Entry 49 of the List—}., any law that<\/p>\n
V sgvoulzifniae by the State Legisiatum either in pursuance of<\/p>\n
}3\u00a313ve14 t1nder List–2 car under the cencument list would be<\/p>\n
 under Article 254 9:’ the Constitu\ufb01ou of India, if it<\/p>\n
VT  ccanttazy $0 the previsiens of leg’slai:ien made by<\/p>\n
  Farliaxnent in respect of subject matter in List-1 of Schedule VII<\/p>\n
of the Constitutitm of India.\n<\/p>\n
.11-\n<\/p>\n
9. He aim refexred to another decision reported in <\/p>\n
:2 sec 77 in the matter of STATE OF ”\n<\/p>\n
OTHERS Mus\u00bb BASANT NAHATA and submitted ‘t.b_a.;}f,*;V1\u00a2ig\u00a7s\u00a7:gu~v\u00a7’   A <\/p>\n
policy must be in conformity with theI\u00bbAco1:;._a:=.4\u00a3ii3;jufi\u00a7)Ii$_l’i\ufb01ia:;1x:\u00a7\u00a7;1f\u00a7: <\/p>\n
if that is not so, the Court’s d\u00a2c1a;auo5a_e1? the eV1eegi\u00a7:a\ufb01on:  A <\/p>\n
unconstitutional cannot be  oerio.  of
\ninteztferenee with the ._  Iegislamm
\nshouid lay down the   which the
\ndeiegatee has to  tlee  and vague
\ndelegation V.  st\u00e9xtutelprovision as<\/p>\n
uncons\ufb01twjtio\ufb01ai…\n<\/p>\n
10. He”V.s\ufb01hn\u00a7itfe&’..’Ath4et, 24-A being in violation of<\/p>\n
_Art:io1eu and  ofthe Constitution of India and being<\/p>\n
   eielegated “” “iegisla\ufb01on is unconstitutional and<\/p>\n
unenf:+rc\u00e9a&;:e.o <\/p>\n
1″1  H0113, learned Advocate General submitted<\/p>\n
   ‘once “1’:1:1e validity of an Act or the Rules is upheld, Court
\n “jurisdiction to 1″\u20ac-COI1Sid\u20acI” the same once again. in this
\n‘” he also relied on the judment of this Court; in LAXMAN<\/p>\n
‘ OMANINA BHAMANEE case (supra) and submitted that. Rule 24-<\/p>\n
A as it was then, did pmvide for displaying the name beam! or<\/p>\n
-4\u00ab.4Govemme;;tA1-to make rules.\n<\/p>\n
Sig board of the establishment in Kannada language and this<\/p>\n
Court having upheld the said Rule, the subsequent amve\ufb01ttinent<\/p>\n
is not amenable for questrioning before this Court. \u00a7’i”o’<\/p>\n
his contention, he relied on a decision zeporteci    _  <\/p>\n
8 in the matter of IZIELJ-II (mom AND M;’L\u00a7.s– <\/p>\n
-~vs- SHAMBHU NATE MUKHERJI AN1i’o%i*HERs  svuimjiteai’  <\/p>\n
that, when the Court has held Rake?-‘\u00a5-A as’i:t_trt2e  is not V<\/p>\n
pennissible to raise the  issiie pn di\ufb01ereht gound
\nand submitted that it is easy as ‘ci\u00a7ts<3ever__i:'t'es\u00a7i.3.V'\u00a7g1\ufb01g3unds of attack
\nto sustain the  _e11oi%\u00a2eti to raise such<\/p>\n
gonads once \u00a7A1[_\u00bbIi\u00a7.\u00a7   'a noti\ufb01cation cannot<\/p>\n
be strmck\ufb02 doyvtt   to be placed before the
\nLegislatureiaztd'  by vigil of the legislature.<\/p>\n
113; -He .'Sut\u00a7'm1;tted that, Section 40 of the Act<\/p>\n
I-V:.Ved:3feI*S%" tioii\u00e9er "oz; thctv\u00e9t\u00e9ite Government to make rule to sub-<\/p>\n
serve  the Act, Anything that is incidental to the<\/p>\n
t    0f .  'Etch the power is eonferre\u00e9 on the State<\/p>\n
Display sf Sim beard<\/p>\n
 \u00ab._\u00a7i;e'ds):mE:ii};'.an\ufb02y in Kannada language in the State 0f Kaxnataka
\n  be said as outside the eeope of delegated legislative<\/p>\n
 _:uI\u00a7fG\u00a7\u00a56I' of the State Govemment,u:t1der Sec\ufb01on 46 of the Act,<\/p>\n
insofar as shops and establishments are concerned, the sign<\/p>\n
.r:;:\u00a7,\/<\/p>\n
xi<\/p>\n
9s*;\u00bb%\/:\n<\/p>\n
_ 33 _
\nboard and the name board being incidental and the display of
\nname bean} in Kannada language cannot be called as emside<\/p>\n
the scope of the delegated legjsla\ufb01on. In this regard, <\/p>\n
to a decision reported in (2003) 3 sec: 321 in
\nSTJOHIVS TEACHERS TRAINING E\\LST1\u00a5Vef3’E”;Q.E.{}I<E1NA\u00a3,A A'
\nDIRECTOR, NATIONAL COUNCIL FORV T:\u00e9'gAti*H\u00a3*;e:<\/p>\n
AND ANOYHER and submitted _to  ou\ufb011=wh\u00e9ther" V L'<\/p>\n
any legisiation suffers \ufb02ux}; excessi9e""deiegatios',' it_Ais_:\u00a71ecessa1'y*<\/p>\n
to consider the subject matter, -\ufb02ie s\u00a7ihe1i1e':z:gxid the provisions of<\/p>\n
the Act including  pream'i3ie–   circuxnstaslces<\/p>\n
in the backgealisd   1' \ufb02se  enacted. He also<\/p>\n
submit\u00a3eci.VVv "    sissays presume that the
\nsuboxtiinaeg. virs\ufb01 and if the Court \ufb01nds that<\/p>\n
two const;:ucti\u00a7$ns_VVare,  the construction which validates<\/p>\n
'V 'the  be  To support his contention that there
\n \u00e9vdseiiega\ufb01on of legislative pcwer nor Rule 24-9; is<\/p>\n
     on a decision nepsrteci in (1980) 1 .S'CfC 340
\n   the s. of ms REGISTRAR op CO-OPERATIVE'
\n   TRIVANDRUM A.-ND AN'O'IHER -vs- K.KUNJA.sMU
\n WERS and submitted that, the said case also pertains to<\/p>\n
'V V  _ .4 legislation and so-calw Henry VIII ciause and<\/p>\n
submitted that the Apex Court on interpretation has ebsczveci<\/p>\n
 iae in eonsonanee with the purpose of the Act.<\/p>\n
– ]4 ..\n<\/p>\n
than Court must examine the preamble, the scheme and ether<\/p>\n
available material to see if there axe any discernible gimj\ufb01elines<\/p>\n
and further euhmitted that, too rigorous app}ication\u00a7;..ef as ‘<\/p>\n
the provisions of the Act may itself occasiona71-\ufb01x   V’ <\/p>\n
frustxating the very objects of the Aef i::.sa1_;e’e.d of<\/p>\n
them. He further submitted that,  <\/p>\n
Tamil Nadu Government had 3 of<\/p>\n
shops and estahlishmentg  the  board,
\npredominantly in Tamil   rule has been<\/p>\n
uphel\u00e9 by the   e  A ‘e  <\/p>\n
13.  1:.e?:hese:\u00a71’eeieidiie;’iea:ned Acivocate General
\nsubmittecf    incidental to eany out the<\/p>\n
purpose of tlie een_fe1fs”p<;:\u00a7\u20acver on the delegated Iegisiation to<\/p>\n
– make   te s.\u00a3113’=-sengev the intendment of the Act and
\n boaxti predominantly in Kannada language
\nthe fundamental right to carry on the trade<\/p>\n
nor it  exeee\u00e9iee of delegation or beyond the scope of deiegated<\/p>\n
ff ‘ ‘ Iegie}a.:ipn. “‘<\/p>\n
 14-. Sri.Vijayaehankar, zeamee Senior Coimsel in reply<\/p>\n
“-\u00abe\ufb01bieitted that, ineidentai cannot be independent, but it must<\/p>\n
He also<\/p>\n
\/.\n<\/p>\n
52;;\n<\/p>\n
reiterated the provisions of the Act and submitted that. merely<\/p>\n
because the rule is Iequired to he placed before the <\/p>\n
legislation does not get vaiidated if it is beyond    ‘<\/p>\n
delegated 1e\u00a7’s3.a\ufb01on. He alse sumrgesd’ :;rg\u00a7\u00a3,’    k A’<\/p>\n
question was not the subject matter *<\/p>\n
such, the writ petition cannot beT_;ejectedA’or  .0-:1: the * L’<\/p>\n
guund that the issue haebeen  it”  he
\nreiied on a judment mpeifed.    1520 and also
\n1991 Vol.4 sec 139 to sum; ‘ V:1;e_t_,  rendenm
\nwithout  a judgment in per
\nirzqunizm and  earlier decision of this
\nCourt deajit      this Writ petition nor the
\nsaid decisie’1’:__didV  of subordinate legislation<\/p>\n
and as  it \ufb02dt affeci the petitionefs case.<\/p>\n
-‘ v  A  iii tLl:ie.;&1i,ght ef”i:A1\u00a7e canten\ufb01ons raised by the pa1’tne’ S.<\/p>\n
the_ \u00e9\u00a71;evs’ti<}ji\u00bb– for consideration is as under:<\/p>\n
"'F_\ufb017Iteif;ef: 24-13 of the Kamataka Shops and
\n Establrehments Rules, 1963 is ultra virm<\/p>\n
   'A   the cieiegaied Iegisiative power?"\n<\/p>\n
  16. To appreciate the conten\ufb01ons ef the parties, it is<\/p>\n
   -\ufb01ecessaxy to look into the object, the scheme and intendment of<\/p>\n
the legislature to enact the Kantzzataka Shoes and Commercial<\/p>\n
– E5-\n<\/p>\n
Estabiishmtznts Act, 1961. That: statement of objects and<\/p>\n
reasons of the Ac: is to have a unjforxn law in the \u00a7_)__f<\/p>\n
and emgioygent in Show and commemial   b <\/p>\n
Before the Ac: was promulgated,
\nenactments operating for di\ufb01”erVe\u00bbn_t\ufb02  for  .h!\u00a3z;\u00a7<f1vi*as n
\nMadras Shops and Estab\ufb01shmeni:\u00e9;L'L\u00bb.::5V:\u00a3.\u00e9:t1  and
\nfor Mysore: area. Mysore     1948
\nwas in force, for Hydemlz\ufb01d'    Shops and
\nEstablishments #195    Bombay ama,
\nBombay Shops';   was in force. To<\/p>\n
provide  law, the leg'siat1,:re has<\/p>\n
brought in jp1"es'ei)tV   aim and object to provide for<\/p>\n
_ the Iegxglation of cofiditioj\u00e9as of work and empioyment in shops<\/p>\n
 Preamble of the Act reastis as<\/p>\n
    n<\/p>\n
A 'An  Jprovide for the regulation of oonditians of
\nV wcrk  ernplcrymeni in shops and <:9mmerm'a!
\n x T  t-zsiai\u00e9fishrnents.\n<\/p>\n
WHEREAS it is eywedient to provide for the<\/p>\n
  r\u00a7\u00e9guIai2’on af conditions of work: and errzpfeytneni in
\n shops and commercial mtabiishments and ether<\/p>\n
irzcidentai matters. ”\n<\/p>\n
g ‘ \u00a7<\/p>\n
– E? –\n<\/p>\n
There are nine chapters in all. Chapter II deals with Iegistration
\nof establishments, Chapter III —- Hotlrs of Work of employees,<\/p>\n
Chapter IV —- annual leave with wages, Chapter V – “am<\/p>\n
compensation. Chapter VI — Employment of
\nWomen, Chapter VII – Enforcement and inspec1:io;1,lv:A4(3ha’g;:i:fi?f._’lsillgf  b\n<\/p>\n
– O\ufb01ences, Penalties and Proce\u00e9ure    <\/p>\n
&isce11aneot1s. in Chapter-II, cmp_1oye:4*’oflcveIy  <\/p>\n
requixes to register his estabnshmexgrin terms c.\u00a3’R1\ufb01; %3V–A by
\nsubmittiog Foam-A. Any chmage xegistratio\ufb01 is”vrequ11ed’
\nto be infozmed under  the Inspector.\n<\/p>\n
Section 6 deals wjmlglgsmg: o:’l\u00e9’stabii\u00e91;;..vn\u00a2n;1;;’ {o be informed to<\/p>\n
the Inspe\u20ac:\u00a7or.__  with issue of appointment
\norders. Chls;pt;er–Iil   segis\ufb01a\ufb01on of establishments.<\/p>\n
What is s.regis\ufb01at_:lo\ufb01 of employment could be gathered fmm<\/p>\n
   I3′(:t1l’l’.l.l)L-A pzovides for an application for<\/p>\n
” estslalishment it requires the details of the<\/p>\n
Z  ost,ablis11me_;1’tl  the name of the business, number of
\n” “‘e1liployecs,vv._oden, Women and young persons. Similarly, the
\n  gasovisions relate to change in the establishment. closure
\n.   _?esltab\ufb01shment anti appoinment order to be issued by the<\/p>\n
  einployer to the emgxloyees. Chapter-HI relates to providing<\/p>\n
Iegulation of Worlcing hours of the employees prohibiting the<\/p>\n
-}g-\n<\/p>\n
ernpioyer making the empioyees to work more than nine hours
\non any day any forty–eight he-urs in any week. It also regulates<\/p>\n
the overtime Work. Section 8 deals with extra Wage:3i f9r<\/p>\n
overtime Work; Sec\ufb01on 9 deals with interval for rest.   _<\/p>\n
eieals with spreading of work. which should not   ”  <\/p>\n
htmrs inclusive of intervai for rest.\n<\/p>\n
zestriction on opening and C10SiI1g’i}\u20ac}\u00a31I’S (if the esf::\u00a3e1’isI\u00a7\ufb011eI\u00a7;t \u00a315  ,<\/p>\n
no establishment shall be open.ed’V’VL’eaEriie_r   or
\ncloseci later than the time’   weekly
\nholidays. Scc\ufb01on 13 dealg 5%,};  selling of the<\/p>\n
products (yutsidef closing hours.\n<\/p>\n
Chapter-IVV *g1″an”\u00a3. 0f have with Wages, Wages
\ndtmn’ g leavcg  xtief: advance ammmt. recovexy of<\/p>\n
unpaid wages: e.._'{3I1a1;\u00a7te:;’.*’?_ deeds with wages and compensation.<\/p>\n
..\\\u00a7{age$;V.\u00bb;}:3,;1u\u00a7’.t’z10t be anything contained in Payment of<\/p>\n
   __ compensation under the Workmexfs<\/p>\n
 Chapter-VI deals with Iesiaie\ufb01on on<\/p>\n
‘V VV e;;ap}oj?\u00a7B.g  in the estabiishment, prohibiting women<\/p>\n
.4 ” during the night hours. Chapter-VII deais
\nV  ‘e\ufb02jfemement and inspec\ufb01on conferring y-owe: on the
\n itxspeetor. (3hapter-VIII deals with penalties. Chapter-IX deals<\/p>\n
3 {with misceiianeous as regard to maintenance of registers,<\/p>\n
‘\\<\/p>\n
– 19 –\n<\/p>\n
recor\u00e9s and \u00e9ispiay of notieee; delegation of yower; dismissal of<\/p>\n
employees with notice and power to make rules.<\/p>\n
17. Reading of these provisions of the    ”\n<\/p>\n
abundantiy clear that, the Act is intende\u00e9eeto\u00e9zegjuiefe   ‘A u<\/p>\n
conditions of an employee in the esmeiish\ufb01ieet  <\/p>\n
There is nothing to indicate that. 9\u00a7Vnef”0f the  * L’<\/p>\n
to regulate his trade in a pa;1icuiar_.e;{anne1j. If the,pro\u00a7is5ens of
\nthe Act: read with conespo\ufb01t\ufb01eg   it clear that the
\nAct is intended to  ‘_of.&V’e-.iI 1.pioyees in the<\/p>\n
establishment    se1″i\u00a7fic’e V’  provide service<\/p>\n
conditione.  ”   to the consequence of
\nviola\u00e9on of 71:iie–  Act. Section 30 deais with<\/p>\n
penalties for vio’imj_io1}._C*–f fhejiiieovisions of Sections 4, 5, 6, 6~A,<\/p>\n
‘:59, m,””:~1,:12e,A.33, k:s.1zs, 25 and 39 and also Sections 3, 1’7,<\/p>\n
24,’ eg 29  \u00a734.Lof.the Act. If ‘these provisions are 1001953 mm,<\/p>\n
   they.m\u00a7\u00a7ii1}y  faiiuze to regetration, faiiuxe to inform the
\n engage   establishment, failure to previrie for closing
\n   to issue appoinmeni: order. faiiure to provi\u00e9e for
\n  Weekly hours, failure to pmvide for intexval for rest,<\/p>\n
‘V ‘  A\u00bb uspeeeding the Work beyond twelve hours, not maintaining the<\/p>\n
opening and closing hears, not providing weekly heiizzlays or<\/p>\n
selling the articles outside the establishment after the clesing<\/p>\n
-29-<\/span>
\nhours, not graniring annual ieave, not granting wages during<\/p>\n
leave period, empioying women and young person d11I’iI1gi Iz.i.ght<\/p>\n
hours and not issuing notice before order of  ref’<\/p>\n
employee. Haxmonious reading of the provisi0nf.3nf-..:t.JheeA_T}5;et  _  <\/p>\n
penalty in contraven\ufb01on of the  ‘of   <\/p>\n
suggests that, Act is intended  _safegnnnr;i the :i:_;ter’e:’3tV ef’<\/p>\n
empioyee and protect hill} \ufb01nm e\u00a7{;3i6ita\ufb01on”?2_\u00a7*  e\ufb01g\ufb01ieyer by V’<\/p>\n
taking overtime work withnnt pi*6iIic\u00a7.i12g””1\u00a7{ages’g ‘ 1’1ot” provi:ding
\nSafety’, not granting ilolidajylrs’;   if the rules
\nframed are also _cg  the leave with wages<\/p>\n
register in    9 deals with not providing<\/p>\n
V leave  Wages  of  ‘:’;he persons employed. Rule 1′? deals<\/p>\n
 noigumcienuy lighted. Ruk 13 deals with<\/p>\n
  stairs for a building of more than one<\/p>\n
  \ufb02oorAi’n__te1fns.gefAthe said ruie. Rule 19 relates to proviading an<\/p>\n
” -ez\u00e9iteml e:a1rs*. ;’ to open \ufb01nm inside the establishment Rule 20<\/p>\n
V’   gsreeautzion against \ufb01re-; not keeping certi\ufb01cate of each<\/p>\n
   employees; not maintaining the reg’ste:rs, zeeortls and<\/p>\n
  nude: Rule 24, netmaintaining the rem’ste1*s and records and<\/p>\n
dispiay of nonoes. Ali these rules relate to employment of an<\/p>\n
..  ..\n<\/p>\n
the Act and would be unconstitutional. May be, displaying the
\nname board in Kamzada language is vexy laudable, but if such
\nres\ufb01ic\ufb01an is imposed without having any source of pov\u00a7;’er,r’sjuch
\nact would be iiiega}. In case of exercise of poWe_1_’;”t\u00a7’f
\nlegislation, it must: \ufb02ow from the delegation of
\nthe provisions of the Act Section
\npower, which reads as under: \u00ab ‘ dd . V
\n“40. Power to make  S’mt\u00e9”{I%ev\u00e9}vnneeni
\nmay be nott’j1’oati<}zj:, make…  to  91:51 the
\npurposes of this Ace ._ VA V
\n(2) In particular  gaimz Lgrejudice :9 the
\ngenerality f’!he fo;*\u00e9gaing pe\ufb01zzer, rules made under<\/p>\n
sub-section ‘;'”\u00a3.}_Te’nay_ pr._’ozride~.iri .resp_efc\u00a3 of the health
\nand saJ%fveweW*e Of *”‘?’~P3j\u00b0?!’==?8-<\/p>\n
A :3) In’rrio:.\u00a3:i2:g1″iu_\u00a3\u00e9s ‘under this section the Siate
\nGoverrmreni  .pre~z;ide~”that {:2 centraveniion of any
\nmie  be pzgnxehabie with a\ufb01ne which may extend
\nto ten rupees.\n<\/p>\n
 V  , {‘4_).??1e’V33bwer to make ruies conferred by this
\n.  seetimf1,\u00a7’s’–..eubjed to the condition of the rules being
\n V _ ‘ima_de ajierhpzrevious publicatien. ”<\/p>\n
V dd . The \ufb01enereld pdirver conferred on the State to make rules to earxy<\/p>\n
en! the pufposes of the Act Even assuming that the yower is<\/p>\n
  to make rules in respect of matters incidental to the<\/p>\n
  ‘V of the Act, the ineidemai to the purpose of the Act must<\/p>\n
” Vhe in consonanee with the object of the Act.<\/p>\n
-33-<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
18. It is well settled law that, the rules framed under the<\/p>\n
provisions cf the statute form part of the statute. I1;aT’0t.her<\/p>\n
worcis, rules have statutory force, but before 1113 rule. <\/p>\n
the cifect of statutory provision, two conditions   K V’ <\/p>\n
v’iz., (i) it must conform to the pmvision\u00e9’ of. the -:s’e.a’ f:ut\u00a7:._i\ufb01ieief<\/p>\n
which it is \ufb02amed and (ii) it must __c\u00a531\ufb01e  then <\/p>\n
and purview of the rule making  I1″—\u00a2;ith$::” _: two V’<\/p>\n
canditions is not  the r;1i\u00e9’s”5Wo*u1d:bc void.
\nThis propasition is reiteratc-;\u00a3:iV%   6 in the matter
\nof GENERAL  AND ANOTI-[ER M
\n123- DR. SUB}\u00a3}\u00a71SI{“\u00a7?I\u00a7i&i’\u00a7}_T:)f\u20ac;4\u00a7V:Y}i’\u00a3)A”??I\u00a7{?D_ ;–‘1NOT\u00a5–IER.<\/p>\n
19. 9″I*_1;u%; Apex Excision reported in (2004) 8 soc<\/p>\n
74?’ in the 11ia–t\u00a3ei’* -7.’DR.,;ia7QHAc;\u00a3wDRA PRASAD SINGH wus-<\/p>\n
~  .’F?gf\u00a3AI\u00e9V’L1E’!}ISLA1’YVE cowvca, AND omms while<\/p>\n
 .v.v\u00a7?it1;V’~:1\u00a7e.’g9;uboIdinate Ecgisla\ufb01on at para–I3 has observe\u00e9<\/p>\n
as 1i:1d’eI’:\n<\/p>\n
“‘I3. ‘.,,  , . . The mics being delegated legislation are<\/p>\n
 A  to certain  mI factors. Urzderfying the
\nx. ‘ ‘agncept of delegated Ieg\u00e9slaiion :3 the basic pnhciple
\n*  the legislature defegates because if cannot<\/p>\n
–V ctireciiy exert its wr’II in every detail. AH it can in<\/p>\n
3 practice do 1% to lay down the outline. This means ihai
\nthe intention of the Iegaisiature, as indicated in the
\noutiine (that is the enabling Act), must be the prime
\nguide to the meaning of delegated iegislazi\u00e9n and the
\nextent of the power to make it. The true extent of the
\npower gaverns the Iegal meaning of the delegated<\/p>\n
.34-\n<\/p>\n
legislation T113 deieaate is not intended to travel
\nwider than the object cf the legislature. f(‘he detegatefs
\n\ufb01mction is to serve and promote that object, while zitt”,
\naH’thnes rewna\ufb01mbyg hm”; &>it f\ufb01za is the rub3<Qf 'g
\nprimary intention. Power delegated by an enc::;'1me1itL-   3
\ndoes not enable the ctuthoriiy by regulations tc: 1gaxt\u00e9r24:i'—  '7' '
\nthe scope or general operation of the enax:m1em_bu[I'\u00bbz's'
\nstricify wzcillary. It mil! autho\ufb02\ufb01\ufb01b {he _pi"bt}ision""Qf'.V
\nsubsidiary means of carrying finio"'e;\u00a7}'e<:i .; is"* 1
\nenaded in the statute itself  ur\u00a7i'IT ..-aov\u00e9-2;: what " 5%
\nincidental to the execution of its spe\u00a7x'j"\u00a7\u00a2 provis_z'on~.  "
\nsuch a power will not supgio\ufb02 atIemp_{\u00a7__ to :\u00a33iden_ the}
\n\ufb02urnoses of the Act, to add  diffe'reni'vm\u00e9ms' 'of
\ncarrzginq them our or to cieparffrom or va:v:1;'its ends.<\/p>\n
The qformaid prirzcipfe will with greater rigour
\nwhere rules have b\u20aceri —  1r:.V_e3_c\u00e9rc:7se of power
\noorjerred by a oonstiirziioruaf. F50 rules can<\/p>\n
be \ufb01arned which hav3.._th\u00e9'–3jffaci;V of 4.:-'nlarging or
\nrestricting the_a9,nten_:'t  arnpf\ufb01ucie ':f.\\f  the relevant
\noon.stfiutions._i:I  " -the rules shauid<\/p>\n
be inte1p_re'\u00a3.\u00e9d_ de_n\u00a3\u00a7:isie?a\u00a7 i\u00a3{ith–..th\u00e9: aforesaid principle. "<\/p>\n
V " .  ;\u00a74gid,\u00a7\u00a7rEini'ng by me)<\/p>\n
Thus,  th\u00e9"~d\u00a2cisVi\u00a2=n e_f  Apex Court it is clear that the<\/p>\n
'V\u00e9ieZcgavf\u00a7\u00a7:"}1\u00a3;sV:13.c) po\\$zEr'%—-Widen the purpose of the Act or to add<\/p>\n
11\u00a2;-a" jneans. The Apex Court in another decision<\/p>\n
  I'ep<\u00a7i:fcf:\u20aci i11 A\u00a7R_'.'V3.3VUV00 SC 1059 in the matter of KUNJ Beramzl<\/p>\n
  \u00a34A;L Boviyarpaisri) OTHERS "~vS- STATE 05' HP. AND omm-'es has<\/p>\n
   t\ufb02at. for caxzrym 9; out the purpose of the Act, the Stata<\/p>\n
  in exercise of delegated power cannot bring Within<\/p>\n
 '  A\u00bb '"i\ufb01\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7t=:t of the mks What has been exciuded by the Act itself.<\/p>\n
1,<\/p>\n
.. 2\u00a7 ..\n<\/p>\n
20. Object of the: Act was considered by this Couxt in the
\nmatter of M\/s.m1LLIP0s & Co. (supra) at para-23 a31\u00bb*;1:.”‘*3′.f\u00a3. is
\nreiterated that, the Act pmvicies for rczgulating the
\nwork and emfsleyment in the shops  K V’
\nestab\ufb01shmtants and the rationale b\u20ac:hirv;tdmVtli\u00e9;\u00ab
\ninterest in the health of the workers.\u00bbA:4\\sf]5;t;+.V_
\nsegment 0f the community and
\nis essentially and vifally i:1v1.?:?tf\u00a7este<}.v.""'  ''~ :<\/p>\n
21. In simiiar   Court in the<\/p>\n
matter of BASAIYT’   considered the<\/p>\n
power of   dbsewed as under:\n<\/p>\n
“I9.”-_The_ T’iIfL\u00e9._.IegisIature’s delegating its<\/p>\n
powere3_ in jIa_v\u00a23a;i’ _of tir.e executive is a part of<\/p>\n
iegislaiiz;-ef\u00a2anczio1L.. ms a constituent element of ihe<\/p>\n
Iegisfative pqwef 4:23″ a whole under Ariicle 245 of the<\/p>\n
._”C\u00a71fIn,siitz;tior:.  \u00abSum delegation of power, however,<\/p>\n
. V V\u00e9bszrzizbt V323 wide, unottmalised or unguided. The<\/p>\n
 !egis_Itt.ft.tre”tahi?e delegating such power is required to<\/p>\n
 -yfay \u00a7i’1gv~a’*iter”fa or standard so as to enabfe the<\/p>\n
 zieiegat\u00e9fe 19 act within the framework of the statute.<\/p>\n
 p\ufb01mipie on whim’: the power of the legislature is<\/p>\n
:2,\u00bb .I;\u20acgexerc:’sed is required to be disclosed It is case<\/p>\n
 mat esseniial legislative \ufb011nc.fions cammt be
\n” ‘ delegated.”\n<\/p>\n
    22. In the light of the ebsaxvation made by the Apex Court<\/p>\n
   mgani to the deisgatcd iegisla\u00e9on under Section 40 of the<\/p>\n
Act, it prov\ufb01es c1car–cut criteria for making the rules. Said<\/p>\n
 ,:(~..’i, i<\/p>\n
W26\ufb01
\np\u00a5’0’J”iSi{)11 dues not Shaw that the State Geveznment in the<\/p>\n
capacity of suboxtiinatc iegissla\ufb01on Couid make rule :ii’.\u00a7i’.[ the<\/p>\n
matter, which is not avail provided under tha <\/p>\n
outside \u20ac116 scoge of th\ufb01 same.\n<\/p>\n
23. Clgnstzitutiori provides for u\ufb01e o’f ia;;i\u00a7;’31\u20ac$~.’;g\u00a3:V._.:i”\u20ac:rV<\/p>\n
purpose’ Article 343 of the C0jns’a’tii’\u00a3i<5:1.. c1\u00a7a3}\u00a7.".\u00e9_\u20ac;$fith' <\/p>\n
language: 0f the Union, Hindi  sc1"\u00e9\u00a7t.'7j'st2iVVted as
\nofficial mnguage, however, \ufb01\u00e9xiad of' V13 g\u00e9ears from
\nthe commencement of the  languagts; was<\/p>\n
continued as   ij'i}ni(::11. Power is<\/p>\n
conferred  "xEI’_l’V~’1,’:V\u00a7;’lc3 asV_LVt;h\u00a7\u00a7”\u00a7a\ufb01gL1age for o\ufb02icial purpose. in<\/p>\n
\u20ac)3.”d\u20acI’ to ma};<'::–.. as of\ufb01cial lauguage of the State<\/p>\n
 .. .1J1A;t1\u00a7::1j\u00bb'2"%xrt":i;x;fIc 345V,,"tE;e____Lcgis}gature of the State has to isgisiate<\/p>\n
 'E"\u00a71t,: il\u00e9tw fe:v'_vfiz\u20ac:'  purpose.<\/p>\n
  C}f.\ufb01\u20ac;\u00a7ia{T:'Ianguag\u00a2 is not cie\ufb01ned un\u00e9er Article 366 of<\/p>\n
 iii}? Cxgns\ufb01igg\ufb01\ufb01n of India, hcrwever, the Wcmii "of\ufb01ciai" in
\n   \u00e9gnse meaas, "gersen who holds an o\ufb01ice: of or
\n  is of\ufb01cia} by arm emplayed ix}. acme public ca\u00a7)acity."
\n ' alga means, gsublic e:3\ufb01}ce1~ ia reiatimix to the du\ufb01\ufb01s of 111\u00bb:<\/p>\n
of\ufb01ce. Cionstimtion itself has 119": envisaged or confezzrezi any<\/p>\n
-33-<\/span><\/p>\n
the Constitution is not subjected 10 any restrictions,<\/p>\n
Any sectian of the citizens @ a right to have a
\ndistinct language, scrrspt or cufture of its awn
\nirrespective of the fact whether that secticrn is
\nmirwrity or a major:’\u00a3g,: and is entitled to conservev
\nsaid right, Rule 24-A f the Rules provides f}’\u00a7.g,i’ .tVize%,  ”
\nname board shaii be in Kannada: and wheneva\u00e9gr dih\ufb01.  –‘~’ ”
\nlanguages are also used, the vemion in such czihef ”
\nlanguages ska?! be beiow the Karmadar. vers2’cn;”…F?9m.–A
\nthis it is seen the said rule tio\u00e9krzot gin _rzny’ wa3;..} .&
\nprevent the petiiionerfrom dispirzying. #123 izan1e’boar*d__ :, A
\nof his shop in his language :’.e.,”.Mc;rcithi cifor2g.wit?;:_”~.. V’
\nKannada If that is so, if cpannehb\u00e9 sczi(7;*”1\u20ac?’;;:zi’_ the’;
\npezizioner has in any way”-Egeen “prevent”-3d”~–:’ffbm’
\nconserving Maraihi language  he is-:1,Iso’a1I\u00a3)u:eci<\/p>\n
to use Marathi I  aicfngg wifh. K <\/p>\n
Thus, it is clear that the ru1\u00a2_ Wahg \u00a2\u00a71__i\u00e9\u00a7\u00a7\u00a5:\u00a7.c513},\u00a7(i\u00bb.:\u00a3)Vn’-V*the gonad that<\/p>\n
Maxatili 1ang1:ag::*’ib::;a;f-3 a  terms of Articles<\/p>\n
29 and  of  of i\ufb01dia. This Court has mat
\nConsidered’Ai;hVe”issucfis\u00a7.L:Vi:}’iv\ufb01\u00e9ih\u00e9r the rule: is ulira Hires as it is<\/p>\n
hey-:>1::.d_i”1;:e &\u00a7iiegatc\u00e9” i\u00e9gi\u00e9l\ufb01\ufb01ve power. Further the said<\/p>\n
‘vg\u00e9mvisi\u00e9\ufb01 i3″*310i’Z.S11b\u00e9\ufb01f\ufb01f\u00e9d by the pmsent Rule 24% impugned<\/p>\n
iii ”  by notrifica\ufb01on dated 31.12.2008. Even<\/p>\n
_ –   oti1ei*s:2j\u00a7\u00a7\u20ac a1\u00a7\u00a7<:{,': said ju\u00e9gment will not in any way affect the<\/p>\n
. ~'.__.44\u00a7}t3\u00a7:;ifi0\ufb02er's"}\ufb01ight 1:9 qucs\ufb01on tha vali\u00e9ity of neti\ufb01cation. In this<\/p>\n
  is 'L1$\u20ac2fll1 ts Kfftil' the Qbservation of the \ufb02gex Gear: in<\/p>\n
  ijizatter of STATE 01:' 5119. AND ANOTHER -z:s~ SYNTFIlz?'I'IC3S<\/p>\n
%% '  _ ";AA.\u00ab'\u00a79"p CHEMICALS LTD, AND \u00a3\u00a7N{)THER reported in 199114; 306<\/p>\n
' 9: 9 1
\n13 <\/span><\/p>\n
y-\n<\/p>\n
dec\u00a3sz’on is binding not because 0}’ its oonciusiens bzgt in
\nregard to its ratio and p\ufb01napies, laid dawn 1h6?’\u20acfR’. ,_A–!fty
\ndeclaration or cxmciusion mriyed witlwut appIic:iitio\ufb01;.Vbf’
\nmind or preceded without any reason cxmmrrt
\nto be \u00a2:.Eec:Iara\u00a3z’orz of Iaw er authority of a gesi\u00e9ral .:”2s:1?2;cr_e*'” : ‘
\nbinding as 61 precedent Restrainf in H;ii$:\u00e9;ent:\u00a3irag or ”
\ncwerruiing is for sake of stabi\u00a3z’ty.__\u00a2:e’nd.’ urizfz3?ftr1ii y._i2uI’._V
\nrigidity beyond reasonable iimitsv is inirisiotzl 11:) ‘th;_e’ ffs”.QiiiifL ‘
\naflaw.”  ‘    <\/p>\n
31. Leanzad Advocate    <\/p>\n
ju\u00e9gmeni in the matter of  T TRAINING
\nINSWTUTE’ (supra) infera\u00e9i\ufb01ii*s1;b\u00ab:;11i\u00a7_\u00a7:\u00a7i;;\u00a7g–V.iiE3;;\u00a7t; giach rule has to be
\npresumed as inzffa vir\u00a2s_   oprzn for two
\nconstxuctions,    has to be adoimad.\n<\/p>\n
Hawcver, it   Vlcarned Senior Counsel
\nfor the  .p_a*:;#\u00a7gi?ailit3I of two C0}1S12I’l1<:ti{:1I1S.
\nThe p\ufb01n\u00e9ipal  rule itseif is ultra vires and<\/p>\n
delegamd _leg';.\u00a7ia:1v:iAo11."'ha:$';  be oonshiared taking into account<\/p>\n
  t'r:e\u00a2 f:z1Eai\u00a7%:I\u00e9,.._subj\u00e9\u00a7f"Ai11attcr, scheme and pmvisions of the<\/p>\n
 *  "  cannot be two opinion 031 this. Even.\n<\/p>\n
CGI2\u00a7%;\u00a7g1v6I’i\u00a3],\u00a7.\u00a7 .\u00a7}\u00e9:i.a’$AVV.\u00a7I’\u20ac3II1E}}_\u00a3i, subject matter, object, pre\u00e9visicns cxf<\/p>\n
 the stafu\ufb01\u00e9 and the scheme as obsexvcd above, there is no
\n  V’ to cgnstrue tiw mic as shira vires. The \u00e9ecisian ciied\n<\/p>\n
 -.  b:.r* %th@ Iearned Advocate General in the case ef K,K{L7VfJABMU<\/p>\n
 {suprt2\u00a3) 3.130 reiterates the same View 31.28., the provision is a near<\/p>\n
Henry VII: ciause and it has to be examined based on preambie,<\/p>\n
the scheme and other available matsrial to see as tc\u00a7\u00bb:”W[1.1etl1er
\nthere are any discemible gllide\ufb01nas. This
\nthat, in order is \ufb01nd out the extent of
\npurpose 0f the Act, preamble and thejirG:risi\u00a7)ns;v\u00ab\u00e9>f}ch:;Vg\ufb01ci’ vit1;Li;z.s1;b 7,
\nbe considersd. It is not necessary}?\n<\/p>\n
othexwise, but. even if the prd\ufb01i\ufb01i\u00e9ns
\nmain grammatical  ‘\ufb01\u20ac3″”A-po\u00e9sibiiity of
\nconstructing them as z”nt}*a ;:fr\u00e9sL,_v ‘zmd R1116 26 of the
\nRules ixxssofar as   of Rule 2441 of
\nthe Rules is    <\/p>\n
3:; __I_;;$0faf  the matter of SHAMBHU
\nNA???  ‘issue which has been decide\u00e9
\neariier c\ufb01\ufb01n\ufb01t  V .aga:\u00a3:1 on diffemnt grmmd is<\/p>\n
concergxieci, the skarli\u00e9f de\ufb01risiezl is not sought to be rmpened nor<\/p>\n
 AV iihzz. vef\u00e9;*_1iei”‘ t;ie\u00a7:is;i0:1 had d6:a}tWit}:1 the same noti\ufb01catiori. Even<\/p>\n
Aa\u20ac.}i&1:=2?iS:::v,VV”’if ” ~”ci\u20ac:cisi0:1 is rendared witheut reference to<\/p>\n
  C\u00a33I1$1Zi\u00a7\u00a711f.i\u00a7}I1\u00a3’3ii.:}}\ufb01’OViSiG\ufb02S or the statutory” provisions, the said<\/p>\n
3″-‘\u00ab\u00ab.’_\u00a3\u20ac:ecisie311″:%s5__that binding. In my view, the earlier {iecisien does
\n  i1\u00a3\u00a7At’?;a_i\u00a7%; away the pe\ufb01\ufb01e31:a.er’s right to qu-zzsticrzi the 11ei:\u00abt’1’iica::ic:1z,,<\/p>\n
K   bad givsn fzwesh causa of actin.\n<\/p>\n
33, Just because the ruies “firmed by the Stats<\/p>\n
Govanxmanf and are rrzquired ta he piaced brsfx;-\u00abre the lgg\u00e9siature,<\/p>\n
th\ufb01f\ufb01 is :13 rule that piacing hefc-re the iegislature would make
\nthe rule as infra vfrrsas,<\/p>\n
34. in ‘aha light of tbs above diSC{1SSi0j\u20acl, \u00ab9nl3\u00a5*’:}\u00a7:5s-hxiftzjiision<\/p>\n
that can be arztived is that Rule 2-\u00a2\u00a7–A 0f tft:1:::*’-‘.4′:}f’\u20ac21VE::’\u00ab[$2′  4_<\/p>\n
penalty under Rule 26 for violationof Rule    ziir\u00e9\ufb01’ T x<\/p>\n
and are beyond the deiegated iegisla::i;iv:2::’:{3{\u00a7\\i\u00a7?e1;[ 7I <\/p>\n
Hence, Writ Petition c1.r:\u00e9c:1’v:’L\u00e9::’;*s:..Abto b\u00e9 a.l1oi’i\u00a7c\ufb01_,  I<\/p>\n
make the following order:\n<\/p>\n
(2′) Writ Pe\u00a3ition(;f\u00a70i\u00e9?e;i::v<\/p>\n
(ii) RuvIe. 2*,4_-A  f\u00bbi~3’tf:z’:’\u00a7_etg,VrV’  Rafe 25 of the<\/p>\n
  l:?.a’;’\u00a3(:2iV’V(:r'{)??”\u00a3I3′?,tE?3′”CTl’\u00a311 Estabfishrnents
\n   as improsing penalty for violaticn
\n I:?u1e.v;24:i.\ufb01  the Rules is conoemed, declared as<\/p>\n
..u}irc:\u00a5  ‘V
\n   issued by respondent N034 and 5 dated<\/p>\n
A. f.:2\u00a3?09 at Annexures\ufb02 a:n.d D are quashed.<\/p>\n
Sd\/-P
\nIudge<\/p>\n
KN}-\u00abQ’-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009 Author: Subhash B.Adi 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’.:\u00e9’x{,7″r.i_A’ ” wan’ PETITIOK xo.19o1(2w9 ‘V ‘ If V’ T} % BETWEEN: . L’ […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29173","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-06-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-21T13:18:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"32 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-21T13:18:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009\"},\"wordCount\":5908,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009\",\"name\":\"Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-21T13:18:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-06-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-21T13:18:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"32 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009","datePublished":"2009-06-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-21T13:18:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009"},"wordCount":5908,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009","name":"Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-06-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-21T13:18:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vodafone-essar-south-ltd-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-5-june-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vodafone Essar South Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29173","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29173"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29173\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29173"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29173"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29173"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}