Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (0.44 seconds)Digambar Ramchandra And Anr. vs The Khandesh Spinning And Weaving Mills ... on 7 September, 1949
6. Sri Raja lyengar, learned Counsel for petitioner cited -- 'Digambar Ramchandra v. Khan-desh Spinning & Weaving Mills. Co. Ltd', (A) to show that the standing orders once registered are binding on the parties and must prevail over other considerations. That was a case in which rights of parties had to be determined in arbitration proceedings and not one for a writ. It is not therefore of help in this case. The discussion so far has proceeded on the assumption that the declaration is not a ministerial act. The question whether it is so or not need not be decided since the petition has to fail on the ground that the declaration is not shown to have been made without or in excess of jurisdiction. It may however be mentioned that the argument of the learned Advocate General in regard to the declaration not being a judicial or quasi-judicial act has much force. The formalities associated with a judicial or quasi-Judicial proceeding such as notice to parties concerned, opportunity for representation, reasons for the declaration, are not required to be observed. The Registrar is enjoined to make the declaration within three days after an application is filed by the employer or employee irrespective of the difficulty felt in any case to form ah opinion in such a short time & the facts necessary for it being available and either party furnishing these. The only consequence following the declaration is that the party contravening it is made liable for prosecution but the Act does not render the declaration conclusive but expressly provides for its being impeached by the accused as illegal. In effect therefore it is nothing more than a 'brutum fulmen'. The acquittal of the petitioner in a case filed by the respondent for alleged contravention of the provisions of the Act supports this. Perhaps because of this consideration, the provision for the Registrar's declaration is not found in the Act of the Indian Parliament. The declaration has therefore but a recommendatory or moral force and does not by itself create a, liability or impose any penalty. The declaration is discretionary and when no conditions are prescribed for its exercise and the party against whom it is exercised is allowed to challenge it, how the petitioner can seek a writ -- if he deems it necessary at all -- alleging the declaration to be a judicial or quasi-judicial act cannot be easily understood.
1