Sivakasi Chamber Of Match Industries vs Western India Match Co. Ltd. on 20 May, 1977
14. He next contended that the decision of the Supreme Court, on which reliance was placed by the learned counsel for the complainant, was based on implied and not inherent powers and that very wide powers could not be implied through the interstices of a statute. He relied in this connection on the decisions in State of Orissa v. Member, Sales Tax Tribunal [1972] TLR 1735 ; [1971] 28 STC 652 (Orissa), Haji Mahabub Hossain v, Biswanath Nandy, AIR 1971 Cal 381, Patna Electric Supply Workers Union v. A. Hassan, AIR 1958 Pat 427, Rameshwar Dayal v. Sub-Divisional Officer, AIR 1963 All 518, and Mulimani Sanna Basavarajappa v. Basavannappa, AIR 1959 Mys 152. He contended that no Tribunal had inherent powers and that in the Supreme Court case relied upon by the learned counsel for the complainant, implied powers were spelt out from the express powers of the Tribunal and they were so spelt out in order to preserve the continuance of the status quo.