Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

23. Learned Advocate-General appeared before this Court and took me through various provisions of the Act, 1986. Learned Advocate-General referred to Section 9(1) of the Act and stated that on and from the appointed date, the general superintendence, direction, control and management of the affairs and business of the undertaking of the Club, vest in the Custodian, appointed by the Government, under Sub-section (2) of Section 9 of the Act. The Custodian was appointed on April 9, 1986. It is also stated that the provisions of the Act were not stayed by the Supreme Court, and as such the Management of the Madras Race Club vests with the Custodian. Learned Advocate-General refers to Section 12(1) of the Act and states that all club employees, on and from the appointed day, become the employees of the Government Learned Advocate-General then referred to the orders of the Supreme Court passed on April 30, 1986. Learned Advocate-General pointed out that as per the orders of the Supreme Court in W.P. Nos. 665 and 666 and 726 of 1986, dated April 30, 1986, mentioned above, rule nisi was issued returnable by August 19, 1986, It is also pointed out that by order dated April 30, 1986 the Supreme Court has ordered that pending hearing and final disposal of the Writ petition, the Custodian will be in charge of running the races but he will do so subject to the supervision of a Committee of Management consisting of 12 persons, six being nominated by the Government of Tamil Nadu and the other six being elected by the members of Madras Race Club and requested Ismail, Chief Justice, to act as Chairman of the Committee. Learned Advocate General then referred to the clarification issued on October 30, 1986 by the Supreme Court, where a Special Leave Petition was riled by the State against the order of a learned single Judge of this Court, where a direction was given to the Custodian not to take any decision thereafter pending further orders. Learned Advocate- General pointed out that the Custodian will be in charge of running the races but he would be subject to the supervision of the Committee of management and that it has been directed by the Supreme Court that the Custodian, where an administrative decision not of a routine character or any policy decision has to be taken the Custodian must consult the Committee of Management before taking any action. It is also stated that in routine matters the Custodian need not consult any one prior to taking action though the action taken by him even in such matters must be intimated forthwith to the Chairman of the Committee of Management. Learned Advocate-General refers to G.O. Ms. No. 973 Home (Forensic Sciences) Department dated April 9, 1986 and points out that a new department to give effect to the provisions of the Act has been created which is called the 'Department of Racing, Government of Tamil Nadu'. Learned Advocate-General also pointed out that orders regarding the issue of amendments to the business rules and secretariat instructions had not been issued by the Government in Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department separately. Learned Advocate-General also pointed out the Government Order in G.O. Rt. No. 1715 Public (Special-A) Department dated April 9, 1986, by which sanction has been accorded to the creation of a temporary post of Custodian of the Department of Racing in the supertime scale of the IAS, for a period of one year from the date of appointment. Learned Advocate-General also referred to G.O.Ms. No. 1786 Home dated August 16, 1988 by which the Government has declared the Department of Racing as a commercial department and also letter dated February 28, 1989, by which the Joint Secretary to Government has informed the Custodian to avoid the usage of the heading 'Madras Racing Undertaking' and use the correct heading as' Department of Racing (A Commercial Department), Government of Tamil Nadu, Madras 600 032; the learned Advocate-General then refers to G.O.Ms.No. 1314 Home (Forensic Science) Department dated July 13, 1989 by which the Custodian, Department of Racing will be the Drawing Officer attached to pay and accounts office (South) Madras-35. However, the learned Advocate-General has pointed out that no action has been taken by the Government to frame Rules, on the misconception on the part of the Government and due to the opinion of the then Advocate-General. Learned Advocate-General also referred to various changes in the personnel in the office of the Custodian and also referred to the order dated July 28, 1991 by which the Custodian has delegated the power, stating that the day to day affairs of the Department of Racing will be fully looked after by the Secretary of the department. Learned Advocate-General printed out that by order dated January 2, 1992, the present Custodian has been appointed. According to the learned Advocate-General the Government order in G.O. Ms. No. 1786 dated August 16, 1988 was not acted upon in view of the orders of the Supreme Court appointing the Committee of Management. At the same time the learned Advocate-General also pointed out the post of Custodian has been up graded in the post of Chief Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu by G.O. RT No. 4 Public (Special - A) Department dated January 2, 1992. Learned Advocate General fairly stated that the operation of the order of the Division Bench of this Court has been stayed by the Supreme Court except the appointment of the Custodian nothing has been done to give effect to the provisions of the Act by the Government. According to the learned-Advocate-General, the management of the Race Club is being managed now by the Committee of Management appointed by the Supreme Court as well as along with the Custodian, who is an officer under the Act.