Download Now
Home Blog Page 98

Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh (1964)

0

This article is written by Diksha Shastri. It attempts to uncover the details of the landmark case of Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh, where the issues brought forward the negligent acts of certain public servants. Even though the judgement is overruled, it sets an example of the State’s duty over its servant’s liability and other deeper concepts involved in the law of torts. 

Introduction

Negligence involves a willful act or omission that causes harm to another. We’ve all been negligent at one point or another in our lives. But, what happens when the public servants hired to protect the sanctity and peace among the public, go down the road of negligence when performing their duties? Are they held liable for their negligence and wrongdoing? And, can the State be held responsible for the actions of the public servants hired by it for the greater good of the public? The case of Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh (1964), stands as a great example of how to understand the intricacies of such issues. 

In this article, we go back to the years through the case of Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain, when the sovereign actions of the State employees were protected. By discussing the facts, issues, and rationale of the Supreme Court in this landmark judgement, we can establish the scope of applicability of vicarious liability of the state for the wrongdoings of its employees. Especially while performing a sovereign function allowed to them by the law. Besides, we will take a look at the precedents that helped the Court reach the judgement in this case. 

Details of the case

Let’s start with understanding the basic details of the case.

Name of the case: Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh

Court: Supreme Court of India

Date of the judgement: 29 September, 1964

Parties: Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain (Petitioner), and The State of Uttar Pradesh (Respondent)

Represented by: A. V. Viswanatha Sastri and O. P. Rana (for respondent), Mr. M. S. K. Sastri (for petitioner)

Citations:  1965 AIR 1039, 1965 SCR  (1) 375

Bench: CJI PB Gajendragadkar, Justice Kailas Nath Wanchoo, Justice Mohammad Hidayatullah, Justice J.R. Mudholkar, Justice Mahendra Dayal, Justice Raghubar Dayal.

Author of the judgement: Justice P.B. Gajendragadkar

Important provisions and laws: Indian Penal Code, 1860, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, UP Police Regulations

Facts of Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh (1964) 

Before focusing on any other problem, it is very crucial to understand the facts of a legal matter in depth. The facts of a case can either be relevant or irrelevant. But, to have an actual unbiased opinion on a case, it’s critical to understand all facts.

Besides, stating the facts is more like stating what exactly went down in a case before it was brought before the courtroom. So, let’s see exactly how Kasturi Lal’s gold and valuables were seized. 

A businessman named Kasturi Lal was arrested while travelling. The police officers who arrested him conducted a search and seized a lot of his valuables, including gold. When the man was released, they refused to give him back his gold. Resultantly, he filed a lawsuit against the government, and this case revolves around figuring out whether the government is vicariously liable for the actions of its servants, i.e., police officers, or not. Let;s see the details. 

In September 1947, the owner of a duly registered partnership firm named M/s Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain arrived in Meerut to sell his bullion products in the local market. In simpler terms, bullion is another name for pure physical gold and silver. When he was on his way to the local market, three police constables apprehended him in the chaupla bazaar. Without any clear justification or reasoning, they started examining his luggage and goods and later sent him off to the police station. His belongings consisted of: 

  • Gold weighing 103 tolas;
  • 6 mashas and 1 ratti; and 
  • Silver weighing 2 maunds and 6 1/2 seers.

These items were all kept in police custody when the incident took place on 20th September, 1947. Then, on the next day, Kasturilal was released on bail. However, out of all his belongings, only the silver was given back to him. Resultantly, the appellant’s repetitive demands and requests to re-obtain his gold articles turned futile. 

This led to him resorting to filing a lawsuit for the recovery of gold or to get equivalent compensation. After consideration of the price of gold in addition to the interest applicable as Rs. 355,  the total compensation claim amounted to approximately Rs. 11,075/-.

The state, being the respondent in the matter, strongly refuted the allegations, stating that they were not entitled to return either the gold materials or the damages. Their defence was that the said gold was taken into custody by the then Head Constable, Mr. Mohammad Amir. The items were kept under his charge in the ‘Police Malkhana’. However, on October 17th, 1947, Amir fled to Pakistan with all the gold and certain other items from the Police Malkhana. 

The respondent further also stated that they had already taken an action against Amir, and had filed a lawsuit under the Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as Section 29 of the Police Act, 1861. They even contested that best efforts were made by the police team to secure it all. However, they failed to apprehend and take Amir into custody. 

Moreover, the state resorted to the claim that even if the negligence of the police department was proved, the State itself could not be reprimanded for the loss of such negligence. 

Two substantial questions that were raised from these facts also revolved around figuring out the State’s extent of liability. The Trial Court, had sided in favour of the appellant, ie., Kasturilal Ralia Ram and ordered the State to pay an amount of approximately Rs. 11000/- 

Aggrieved by this order, the respondent State had appealed before the Allahabad High Court. They claimed that there was an error in the judgement passed by the Trial Court in favour of Kasturilal. The High Court made the decision to uphold the contention raised by the respondent. The reasoning behind this decision of the High Court was the lack of substantial evidence to establish the actual negligence of the police. Besides, it was also held that even if negligence was assumed, seeking monetary compensation from the State was not correct. 

That’s how all the facts of this case led to the Supreme Court judgement of Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh (1964). 

Issues raised

Once the facts of a case are clear, understanding the issues is an easy task. Based on the facts, the appellant raised the issues against the respondent. In the case of Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain, two main issues were raised: 

  1. Whether the police officers involved were guilty of negligence in taking care of the gold in their custody; and
  2. Whether the State (respondent) was liable for paying monetary compensation to the appellant for the negligence of officers hired by the respondent;

The first issue is a question of facts, whereas the second one is a question of  law. The Supreme Court has pondered upon each of these issues in depth, as discussed below. 

Arguments of the parties

Before moving on to the views of the Supreme Court, let’s delve into the arguments presented by both the parties in the different stages of the case. 

Appellant

When you are aware of how both the parties presented their case, and what grounds of argument they used, it will help you gain a better understanding on how the Supreme Court reached its final decision. 

As a part of the appellant’s arguments with respect to the first issue, it was contested that the Allahabad High Court had made an erroneous decision with respect to both the issues. Moreover, the appellant argued that even after consistent requests, he was not given his gold items back. While moving to the second issue, the appellant argued that once the negligence of police officers was established, it must not be too difficult to relate it back with the state’s liability for its employees’ wrongdoings. In furtherance of this strong argument, the appellant attorney also relied on a previous judgement of the Supreme Court, State of Rajasthan v. Mst. Vidhyawati and Anr (1962). 

In this cited case, the Supreme Court had allowed compensation from the state to victims of an accident involving a government Jeep. This accident had occurred when the jeep was going to or from the repair shop. The Supreme Court here, had observed that the liability of the state arises when a tortious or negligent act is committed by any of its employees in the course of its duty, similar to what happens with any other employer. Moreover, in this case, the Supreme Court also stated that the sovereign immunity given to the government officials was a feudalistic notion of justice, that the King could do no wrong. 

Heavily relying on this judgement, the appellant’s attorney made their contentions to apply the same principles in the current case. 

Respondent  

Throughout the matter, the respondent State had made the following arguments to deny the applicant’s claim: 

  • The police officers arrested the appellant at midnight because they were under the impression that he possessed stolen goods;
  • That the goods were properly provided to the Head Constable, who fled after taking certain valuables;
  • That sufficient legal action was being taken to reach out to him but he had absconded; and 
  • Finally, even if an assumption was made on the negligence by police officers, it would not extend to the state as they were performing their duty.

Laws discussed in Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh (1964)

Now, before diving straight into the judgement, we will take a closer look at all the legal aspects involved in this matter. These legal provisions, along with the procedures they set forth, led to the judgement delivered by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh (1964). Let’s see which legal provisions were involved in the delivery of this judgement.

Government of India Act, 1858

This Act was passed by under British Rule and was primarily tailored to liquidate the British East India Company and then confer all its powers and functions on the British Crown. Section 65 of this Act was cited in the case by the Supreme Court as it conferred the right to sue the Secretary of State of India in certain situations. These provisions were also carried forward in the subsequent Government of India Acts of 1915 and 1935. During the British Raj, this was a significant right for the people of India. 

UP Police Regulations

The UP Police Regulations are state specific legal regulations for the performance of the police. It provides detailed procedures to be followed by the state police in different scenarios. The Supreme Court referred to two specific regulations from this, which shed light on the duty of the police officers to take care of the items seized by them in the course of their employment. Here’s what the two regulations have to say: 

Regulation 165(5)

According to this regulation, in case the police officers, as a part of their duty, take over any items of value, like gold or silver, these articles should be weighed properly before being sealed and securely stored. Further, the specific weight of each item must also be noted down in the general diary. 

Regulation 166

It states that all the property seized by the UP police officers must be kept in the storage of the police, i.e., the malkhana, and its custodian would be the malkhana moharrir. However, if this property description is for cash of more than Rs. 100 or any valuable of an important case, it will be the responsibility of the prosecuting inspector, and will be kept in the treasury, until its disposal. 

Collectively, both of these regulations show that the police officers need to take proper care of the objects that they seize while making arrests. This point is an important observation because it also makes the malkhana moharrir responsible for their action of not keeping it secure. 

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC)

While arriving at the rationale behind this judgement, multiple provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were taken into account. It is an important point to note that since this judgement dates back a lot of years, many of the provisions are now changed and revised. These are the main legal aspects of the CrPC that were involved in this case: 

Power of Police to arrest

The judgement relies on the power of police to arrest a person without a warrant in certain cases when a reasonable suspicion exists that the goods they are carrying might be stolen property. In the judgement, this provision is cited as Section 54(1)(iv). However, the CrPC Amendment Act, 2008 substituted the provision for mandatory examination of the arrested persons. 

Power of Police to seize property

According to Section 550  (as applicable then) substituted to Section 102 of the CrPC, the different police officers have certain powers to seize and keep certain property that is suspected to be stolen. Hence, it was this particular section through which the police officers were able to justify the arrest and seizure of items in the Kasturi Lal Ralia Ram Jain case

Search of the Accused

After Ralia Ram Jain was arrested, but before the property was seized from him, the police officers also conducted a search on him. As relied on by the Court, this search of his person was also allowed under the Section 51 of CrPC.

Custody of seized goods

Once the goods deemed to be stolen are seized from the accused, what happens next, and who is responsible for the custody? This was laid down under Section 523 of the CrPC then. According to this, it was compulsory to notify the magistrate of such a seizure of property that’s facilitated by Section 51. Moreover, it also conferred that the magistrate, then, shall make an order as he may deem fit based on the facts and dispose of the property or return it to the owner. At the present moment, Section 457 of the CrPC is the provision in effect that talks about the procedure to be followed by the police in case of seizure of property.

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)

Once the property was in the custody of the police, was it then their responsibility to keep it safe until its disposal? Moreover, was the head constable who allegedly stole property from the Malkhana responsible? And, what actions were to be taken against him? To answer this, we can rely on Section 409 of the IPC. This is a very crucial legal aspect of this case, as it covers the criminal breach of trust by public servants or other agents, bankers, etc. 

According to this Section, if any person, within the ambit of his duty as a public servant, is entrusted with the possession of property, and if he performs any criminal breach of trust in respect to that property, he is entitled to be punished for either: 

  • Life imprisonment; or 
  • Imprisonment up to 10 years and fine. 

In this case, after the goods were stolen by the then head constable, a case against him under this section was booked. However, it was also stated by the witness that he had absconded to Pakistan. 

Police Act, 1861

Since a breach of trust by the police officers was involved, the legal provisions of the Police Act 1861 also came into play. Section 29 is a provision that was relied upon. It provides for the penalties that a police officer may be liable to pay in case of any negligence of his duty.

According to this Section, if any police officer is found guilty, of either a wilful breach, or a neglect of any law, rules or regulations, or performs any such other act, may be liable to

  • Pay a penalty up to three months of their pay; or
  • Imprisonment for up to three months; or 
  • Both. 

Judgement in Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh (1964)

Now that we’ve seen all the different legal provisions that were brought forward and discussed in this case, we can jump onto the final judgement delivered by the Supreme Court in Kasturi Lal Ralia Ram Jain vs. The State of UP (1964)

While delivering the final judgement, the Court relied on an older precedent of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company v. Secretary of State for India. (1861), which at that time was a landmark judgement on the vicarious liability of the public servants. In this case, a lawsuit claiming damages of Rs. 350 was filed by the aggrieved party company against the Secretary of State, because their ponies were harmed due to the negligence of government employees that were riveting a piece of iron funnel casing weighing around 300 kg. 

Here, the judgement was in favour of the Secretary of State for India, and he was not held liable for the actions of his employees because of the sovereign powers that were delegated to them. 

Hence, even in this case, the Court then decided that there was no appropriate claim against the State. Therefore, it was held that the appeal could not be sustained.

Issue-wise judgement 

Whether the police officers involved were guilty of negligence in taking care of the gold in their custody?

The first substantial issue raised in the case of Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain, which is heavily dependent on the concept of negligence in tort. It shows a breach of your duty to care; it can either reflect on an action or lack thereof. In the present case, the question was whether the police officers were negligent in the performance of their duty while they had to keep the gold secure. Here, an omission to take proper care and follow the proper steps was the act of negligence in question. While determining whether the police officers were negligent or not, three witness statements and other evidence were considered by the Supreme Court. 

A class II officer, Ganga Prasad, was called in as a witness, and his statement was treated as strong evidence for this matter. According to him, the Head Constable, and in – charge of the Police Malkhana, i.e., Mohd Amir, had fled from the duty without giving anyone the keys to the Malkhana. Moreover, he also stated that, when the Malkhana was checked later, a lot of other properties from there were found to be missing. Moreover, he claimed to return Kasturi Lal the articles on 26th October 1947. But, since the gold articles were missing, he could not return them. Then, he also spoke up about the investigation process taking place against the absconded Mohd. Amir. He admitted that no list of the articles was prepared and sent to the officers.  Lastly, in the statement he also confirmed that the items of Kasturi Lal were not kept in the wooden safety box, as usual by the officers. 

Then, the second witness, Sub-Inspector Mohd Umar, was called upon, and his statement was examined.In the statement, he agreed to the seizure of gold and silver valuables of Kasturi Lal. However, then he deposed that these articles were never kept in the Malkhana in his presence. According to him the articles were in the custody of the Head Constable, to whom he had specifically requested to put the items in the Malkhana. Moreover, there was no list made of the goods. Thus, the witness could neither deny or agree whether the police team and officers involved had taken appropriate measures and steps to protect the goods in their custody. 

Another witness, the station officer, named Agha Badarul Hasan’s statement, was also examined. He confirmed that daily procedure was followed, each morning of inspecting all the goods in the Malkhana, by a sub-inspector upon receiving his orders. This witness claimed that neither the gold and silver was weighed, or kept in the Malkhana in his presence. Besides, he stated that he had checked the Malkhana, but no reports were made on this inspection of articles. The witness also claimed that to keep valuable items in the treasury, they usually received orders from the officials. However, in this case no such order was received. 

Then, after considering the statements of the witnesses, the court relied on the relevant provisions of the CrPC and the UP Police Regulations, which confer the powers and detailed procedures that the police officers were supposed to diligently follow in this case. Moreover, it was also observed that, due to a lack of clarity in the provisions of the regulations, the UP police had erred in making the decision. Hence, the Supreme Court relied on the oral evidence presented. 

Thus, it was held by the Supreme Court that the police officers were indeed negligent in looking after the property seized by them from Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain. As per the due process, the articles were not kept in safe custody in the police treasury. Moreover, there was also sheer negligence in the way the articles of gold and silver were treated in the Police Malkhana. No list or report of the weights of the articles was found. 

Hence, the Supreme Court agreed with the decision of the Trial Court that the police officers appointed by the State were negligent in performing their duties. This led to the second issue, the question of law, which was yet to be decided. 

Whether the State (respondent) was liable for paying monetary compensation to the appellant for the negligence of officers hired by it?

Before jumping into the judgement delivered in this case, it is vital to understand two important concepts. One, of vicarious liability in tort, and another, of the doctrine of sovereign immunity. So, let’s first take a look at the concepts. 

Concept of Vicarious Liability

The law of tort is the common law that looks over issues like negligence involved in this case.  As a result, the doctrine of vicarious liability comes into the picture. This concept accounts for the responsibility of an employer for the negligent actions of its employees. However, this is only applicable if the negligent action is performed in the course of employment. For example, A company, XYZ, hires driver D for logistical work. One day, during the transit of the goods to the company warehouse, D got into an accident due to speeding. Now, in case the aggrieved party here seeks damages, they can easily claim it from the company XYZ. This is known as vicarious liability. However, if the company had not given D an assignment and he was found guilty of speeding after his work hours, the company would not be liable for his actions. 

Hence, at a glance, in the present case of Kasturi Lal Ralia Ram, it can be seen that the police officers were acting on behalf of the state, in the course of their employment. However, that is when the doctrine of sovereign immunity comes to the rescue of the state. 

Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity

The inception of this doctrine happened through the application of the common law by the Britshers in India. The doctrine protected the government authority from being sued in a court of law without its consent. It is widely based on the common law idea that the king can do no wrong. The first time that the validity of this doctrine’s applicability in Indian courts happened was in the P & O Steam Navigation case, as cited above. That judgement along with its preceding judgements, was a part of the pre-constitutional era cases relating to the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Over the years, the applicability of this doctrine has been limited, to allow the aggrieved parties to exercise their rights and claim damages against the government when required. One of the important aspects of this doctrine is enshrined in Article 300 of the Constitution of India as discussed above. 

So, it’s evident that both of these concepts are significant in reaching the final decision of the court. Besides, the Supreme Court heavily relied on the precedent set in the P and O Steam Navigation Company case. As discussed above, the decision in that case was in favour of the Secretary. Similarly, the principle of protecting the state due to the performance of sovereign powers vested in it, was applied here, and the claim against the state of UP was denied.

Rationale behind this judgement

In this judgement, heavy reliance was placed on the doctrine of sovereign immunity, which reflected that the king shall do no wrong. As a result, the tasks delegated to public servants through the sovereign power, also could not be booked for issues like negligence. Hence, it was held that even though the gold seized by the police had not yet been delivered back to Kasturi Lal, the State was not responsible for paying him the damages. We will discuss this doctrine of sovereign immunity in-depth while tackling the judgement based on each issue. 

Analysis of Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh (1964) 

In the case of Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs. The State of UP (1964), a lot of importance was given to the sole fact that the negligent act of the police officers happened while they were performing the “sovereign powers” to which they held the authority. 

The material facts of this case were never in dispute. Besides, after the consideration of the relevant provisions of the CrPC, it was also held by the trial court and validated by the Supreme Court that the police officers were negligent in keeping the articles secure, and thus failed to return them to Kasturi Lal. 

Then arose the question of law, that whether the state would be held liable for the tortious acts of its servants, i.e., the police officers. While deciding this, the court relied on the principle that the actions performed by the police officers, even though negligent, were a part of the sovereign power conferred on them. Then, the court relied on the power of the police to arrest a person and seize property that seemed to be stolen. The court held that these police officers of the state were only exercising their sovereign powers as allowed by a statute. Thus, the state was not held vicariously liable for their actions. Based on these factors, here are some points of analysis of the case: 

Application of decision to facts

The facts related to the first issue were that the police officers seized the property on the grounds of suspicion. Then, they failed to perform their duty of storing it securely, until they could return it. Thus, negligence on their part was proved. 

Now, let’s come to the facts pertaining to the second issue. This issue was regarding the liability of the state. The state had employed  these officers as police officials. So, ideally, the state was responsible for their wrongdoings. However, the principle of sovereign immunity is something that protects the state in case of any liabilities that arise while performing sovereign powers conferred upon it. Hence, the action of arrest and seizure of articles was a performance of sovereign function.

Significance of the case

The most significant aspect of this case is that it proves that laws need to change with time. In this case, what happened with Kasturi Lal was obviously not fair, and even though the negligence of police officers was proved, he could not get the damages he claimed for. However, the judicial interpretation of this sovereign immunity has come a long way since then. Usually, judicial authorities now consider all aspects and the current legal provisions before making decisions in similar cases. 

Conclusion 

To conclude, this case is a great example of how it is important to bring changes to our legal system with the passage of time. In the 49th Law Commission Report, suggestions were made to eradicate the applicability of the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Even though this doctrine is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, there are many provisions, like Article 300, that indicate its applicability. In this case, even though the police officers were held negligent, the state was not held liable to pay damages to the victim. Over the years, the course of delivering judgments has changed and now, in recent times, the applicability of these principles is very limited. Hence, this judgement was repealed, as it is an injustice to not compensate the victims for the wrongdoings of state and central government employees. In a number of cases after this, there has been a strong disapproval of the principles that were set forth in the case of Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain vs. The State of UP (1964)

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What do you mean by the doctrine of sovereign immunity?

The doctrine is based on the common law principle that the king can do no wrong. Consequently, according to this doctrine, the state cannot be sued without its permission. 

What is the tortious liability of the State? 

Tortious liability of the state arises when it has been found guilty of any wrongdoing, or omission, or negligent act that causes damage to another person. 

Is the concept of vicarious liability applicable to public servants? 

Yes, currently, the concept of vicarious liability is applicable on public servants, in the same way that it is applicable to private companies. 

References


Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Download Now

Deep Chand vs. State of UP (1959)   

0

This article is written by Shamyana Parveen. This article covers the case of Deep Chand v. State of UP (1959), which is a remarkable judgement in Indian legal history, which essentially covers the doctrine of eclipse and the matter of repugnancy between State and Central laws. The judgement, in this case, rendered important principles concerning the elucidation of the Constitution of India, specifically Articles 13, 31, 245, 246, and 254, which deal with the fundamental rights, legislative powers of the Union and the States, and the doctrine of repugnancy.

Introduction

The Constitution of India framed by the Constituent Assembly on November 26, 1949, and enforced on January 26, 1950, exercises authority over the Democratic Republic of India. The Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution delineates the distribution of powers between the Union and State governments. Certain parallels exist between the case of Deep Chand v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1959) and the doctrine of repugnancy. The Supreme Court has addressed the doctrines of eclipse and repugnancy in this landmark case. The case of Deep Chand v. the State of Uttar Pradesh is a remarkable judgement in Indian legal history. It was decided by the Supreme Court of India on 15th January 1959. The case dealt with the Constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Road Transport Service (Development) Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “U.P.Act”), and the scheme of nationalisation framed under it.

In the case, the Supreme Court noted that a post-constitutional law made under Article 13(2) which violates a fundamental right is void from its inception and a deceased law. It is void ab initio. The doctrine of eclipse does not have relevance to post-constitutional laws and consequently, an ensuing constitutional modification cannot resuscitate it. 

Details of the case

Case name: Deep Chand v. State of Uttar Pradesh

Type of Case: Constitutional law case

Name of the Court: The Supreme Court of India

Bench: The then Chief Justice S.R. Das, Justice K. Subbarao, Justice N.H. Bhagwati, Justice B.P. Sinha, and Justice K.N. Wanchoo.

Date of Judgement: 15th January, 1959

Equivalent citations: AIR 1959 SC 648, 1959 SCR Supl. (2) 8, AIR 1959 Supreme Court 648, 1959 SCJ 1069, ILR 1959 1 ALL 293

Name of the parties: Deep Chand (appellant) and the State of Uttar Pradesh and ors. (Respondents)

Laws involved in the case: The Constitution of India: Articles 13, 19(1), 31, 32, 37, 132, 133, 245, 246, and 254; Uttar Pradesh Transport Service (Development) Act, 1955: Sections 3, 4, 5, 8, and 11(5); General Clauses Act, 1897: Section 6.

Background of Deep Chand vs. State of UP (1959)

The case centred on the Uttar Pradesh Transport Service (Development) Act, 1955. The State Legislature established this Act after taking the assent of the President. The case specifically challenges the constitutional validity of this Act and the validity of the scheme of nationalisation framed under it.

The Supreme Court had to determine whether the State Act was abhorrent to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, and if so, whether the State Act, having received the President’s assent, could still be applied in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The court held that the State Act was absolutely repugnant to the central Act and that the doctrine of eclipse is relevant to the case. This doctrine posits that any law incompatible with fundamental rights is not rendered void but remains in a state of eclipse and can become efficacious again if the inconsistency is removed by a Constitutional Amendment.

Doctrine of repugnancy

The Doctrine of Repugnancy is a legitimate principle in the Indian Constitution that addresses the dispute between Central and State laws. It is preserved under Article 254 and serves as a crucial provision in managing the federal structure of the country by delineating the legislative powers of the Centre and the States.

Doctrine of eclipse

An eclipse occurs when one object blocks the view of another. The Doctrine of Eclipse comes into play when a law or Act violates fundamental rights. In such cases, the fundamental right takes precedence over the other law or Act, rendering it invalid but not void ab initio. If the limitations imposed by fundamental rights are removed, the law or Act can be reinstated.

The Doctrine of Eclipse declares that any law which is incompatible with fundamental rights is not void. It is not completely constrained but obliterated by fundamental rights. The dispute can be abolished by Constitutional Amendment.

The Judiciary is the protector of the privileges furnished in the Constitution of India. It is the chore of the judiciary to prevent the action of the Legislature and the Executive where they contravene these rights. The fundamental rights are given to the citizens subsequent to the adoption of the Constitution of India on 26th January 1950. When the Constitution was adopted, some laws were in direct conflict with the fundamental rights which were existing at that time, so the Supreme Court came up with certain principles or doctrines, in order to regulate the rationality of these laws, one of which was the ‘Doctrine of Eclipse’. This doctrine emerges straight from Article 13(1) of the Constitution of India which is a segment of the fundamental rights, which states, “all laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the initiate of this Constitution in so far as they are incompatible with the provisions of this Part, i.e. Part III, shall, to the extent of such unpredictability, be void”. The doctrine of eclipse anticipates fundamental rights as expected in essence. It is stated that if a law predating the Constitution conflicts with fundamental rights, it isn’t considered non-existent or void from the outset. Instead, it remains dormant or inactive. This law continues to apply to all past transactions and to any rights and liabilities that were established before the Constitution was enacted. Now, let us look at the facts of this case which raised this issue of repugnancy:

Facts of Deep Chand vs. State of UP (1959)

  • The appellants were operating one business as stage carriages on different routes in Uttar Pradesh and were permitted to do the same under legal authority provided by the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939 using buses that were owned by the Government.
  • The U.P. Legislature enacted the Uttar Pradesh Transport Service (Development) Act, 1955 and the government furnished a notice nationalising routes under Section 3.
  • The appellants received a notice under Section 5 of the U.P. Act, urging them to express disapproval, if any. Later, the objections were taken, they were notified that the same would be heard by a board.
  • The objections reported by all the drivers other than those in the Agra region were heard and the investigation into the Agra region was postponed because the drivers from the Agra territories did not show up again.
  • In the U.P. Gazette, a notification was released as per Section 8 of the Act. Moreover, the Secretary of the Regional Transport Authority, Agra communicated an order, supposedly issued by the Transport Commissioner, to the Agra legion operators, preventing them from operating stage carriages on the specified routes and advising them about permit transfers to other routes.

Issues raised

  1. Whether the provisions in Part III of the Constitution, which safeguard fundamental rights, merely serve as control or restrictions on the legislative authority granted to Parliament and State Legislatures by Article 245 and Article 246. Alternatively, do these rights form an essential foundation for defining and granting legislative competence?
  2. Whether the Doctrine of Eclipse applies solely to laws predating the Constitution’s adoption? Alternatively, can it also be invoked in the context of post-constitutional statutes falling within Article 13(2) of the Constitution?
  3. Are there any Constitutional disputes facing the Uttar Pradesh Transport Service (Development) Act 1955, passed by the State Legislature after Presidential sanction, in the wake of these appeals?
  4. Was there also a dispute over the legal foundation of the State Government’s nationalisation strategy and the associated notices released accordingly?

Arguments of the parties

Appellants

The petitioner raised several significant arguments. Some arguments presented by the petitioner are as follows:

  1. The petitioner challenged the Constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Transport Service (Development) Act, 1955 which was passed by the State Legislature after obtaining the assent of the President since it violated the fundamental rights of the petitioner as mentioned under Part III of the Constitution.
  2. The appellants contested the validity of the scheme of nationalisation framed under the U.P.Act. This scheme aimed to exclusively serve certain bus routes with State-owned buses. The appellants argued that their rights as permit-holders under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 were affected by this scheme.
  3. The issue was brought forth by the petitioner about the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1956 (Central Act). They contended that the Central Act rendered the U.P. Act void.
  4. The appellants contended that the U.P.Act violated their fundamental rights, particularly Article 19(1)(g) (right to practise any profession or occupation). Further, it would violate Article 31 of the Constitution, as it was before the Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1955, as, though the State had assimilated the appellant’s interest in a commercial undertaking and no compensation for the said interest was given as it should be under Article 31.

Respondents

The respondents presented several arguments in defence of the Uttar Pradesh Transport Service (Development) Act, 1955 and the scheme of nationalisation.

  1. The respondents contended that the U.P.Act did not become wholly void under Article 254(1) of the Constitution upon the passing of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1956, and continued to be a valid law supporting the scheme already framed under the U.P.Act.
  2. Even if the Central Act was construed as a repeal of the U.P.Act, the repeal did not destroy or efface the scheme already framed under the U.P.Act due to the provisions of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, which saved the scheme.
  3. Further, it was contended by the respondents that even if the Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1955 could not be relied on to sustain the validity of the U.P.Act, there was no deprivation of property of the appellants.

Laws discussed in Deep Chand vs. State of UP (1959)

In this case, there are some important laws and Constitutional Articles that were discussed, which include:

  1. Uttar Pradesh Transport Service (Development) Act, 1955

This was a State law under which the scheme of nationalisation of transport services was formulated. The Act was enacted to ensure the development of an efficient road transport system, which was considered essential for the planned development of the State’s industrial and economic resources.

Under this Act, the government had the power to nationalise routes and services, which meant that certain routes could be exclusively held by state-run buses. This was said to be done in the interest of the general public and for the efficient organisation of road transport.

  1. Motor Vehicles Act, 1939

The appellants held permits under this Act and were operating buses on various routes in Uttar Pradesh.

  1. Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1956

This central legislation was argued to have brought about a repugnancy with the State law, leading to the challenge of the constitutional validity of the U.P.Act.

  1. General Clauses Act, 1897

Section 6 of this Act was invoked to argue that even if the central law was considered to have repealed the State law, the scheme already framed under the State law would not be nullified.

  1. Constitution of India
  • Article 13: It deals with laws which are inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights. This doctrine holds that any law which was consistent with the fundamental rights at the time of its enactment but became inconsistent due to a subsequent amendment to the fundamental rights is not nullified but remains in a state of eclipse. It becomes unenforceable only against those to whom the amendment applies.
  • Article 31: This article, before the amendment, dealt with the right to property and the provision for compensation for expropriation. The right to property was made a legal right and was moved to Article 300A in Chapter IV of Part XII of the Constitution. This means that while property is no longer a fundamental right, it is still protected under the Constitution. These changes provided the government with more flexibility in acquiring land for public welfare and land reform measures while ensuring that individuals receive fair compensation for the acquisition of their property. The amendment aimed to balance the need for the State to implement land reforms and other public welfare projects with the protection of private property rights. Article 300A states that “no person shall be deprived of his property save by the authority of law”. This implies that the government must follow the due process of law if it needs to acquire private property. The obligation to pay compensation for property acquired by the state, though not explicitly mentioned in Article 300A, is inferred within the Article.
  • Article 245: It delineates the extent of laws made by Parliament and by the Legislatures of States. The case of State of Orissa v. M.A. Tulloch & Co. (1964), involved the interpretation of Articles 245 and 246 along with the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. The Supreme Court discussed the legislative competence of the State and the Union and the concept of repugnancy between State and Union laws.
  • Article 246: It specifies the subject matter of laws made by Parliament and by the Legislatures of States. The distribution of legislative powers under Article 246 ensures a balance between the central authority and the autonomy of States, reflecting upon the federal structure of the Indian governance system. It allows for both uniformity and diversity in legislation, catering to the needs of the nation as a whole and its constituent parts. 
  • Article 254: This is the key article related to the doctrine of repugnancy, which is central to the case. The case of M. Karunanidhi v. Union of India (1979), dealt with the doctrine of repugnancy under Article 254 and the powers of the State legislature versus the Union legislature. The Supreme Court held that when there is a direct conflict between a central law and a State law, the central law will prevail over the State law.

Judgement in Deep Chand vs. State of UP (1959)

The Supreme Court of India delivered the judgement on 15th January 1959. The case primarily dealt with the doctrine of eclipse and the issue of repugnancy between State law and central law under the Indian Constitution.

The case challenged the Constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Transport Service (Development) Act, 1955. 

It was concluded that even if the central Act was construed as amounting to a repeal of the U.P.Act, the repeal did not destroy or efface the scheme already framed under the U.P.Act due to the provisions of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act. 

The Supreme Court ruled that the doctrine of eclipse did not apply in this case. The legislation was passed in 1955 and it immediately became empty. Because it was stillborn, it is now extinct. Therefore, there was never rebirth. If the State deems it necessary, fresh legislation should be passed. It was further stated that when a statute is passed after the enforcement of the Constitution and it is opposed to fundamental rights, it is void from the very beginning. 

Rationale behind this judgement

The rationale behind the case’s decision is based on the interpretation of constitutional provisions concerning the legislative competence of the State and the Centre, particularly in the context of the Concurrent List.

Some of the reasons that formed the basis of the judgement:

  • Doctrine of eclipse: The Supreme Court applied the doctrine of eclipse, which posits that any law that is inconsistent with fundamental rights is not void but is merely overshadowed by fundamental rights. Such a law is not dead but lies dormant and can be revived if the inconsistency is removed at a later stage. But the same is not the case with post-constitutional laws. 
  • Article 254 of the Constitution: The Court examined Article 254, which deals with repugnancy between laws made by Parliament and laws made by the State Legislatures. It was determined that the State law was not rendered void due to the subsequent central law as the State law was not repugnant to the central law at the time of its inception.
  • Balance of lgislative powers: The judgement underscored the balance of legislative powers between the Centre and the States, emphasizing that State laws are not automatically rendered invalid by the mere existence of Union laws in the Concurrent List.
  • Adequate compensation: The Court also considered the aspect of adequate compensation provided for in the impugned Act, which aligned with the requirements of Article 31 of the Constitution concerning the right to property.

Significance of the case in the present pretext

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India scrutinised the doctrine of eclipse. The judicial statute established that the principle of eclipse is inapplicable to any law enacted after the Constitution that violates fundamental rights, rendering such a law invalid from the outset. In Deep Chand v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court of India has determined that the legislation enacted post-constitutionally is founded on Article 13(2), which violated fundamental rights. Consequently, it is deemed unlawful from the instant of its enactment and is considered a non-operative regulation. It is null and void from the beginning. The post-constitutional legislation cannot be brought back by a future Constitutional Amendment because it is not covered from the viewpoint of the doctrine of eclipse. Ultimately, the Supreme Court’s decision established a significant legal precedent by distinguishing between both the clauses of Article 13. While pre-constitutional laws remain in effect unless they contravene Part III, post-constitutional laws that do so are outrightly prohibited and deemed null to that degree.

Judgements referred to in this case

The judgement in Deep Chand v. the State of Uttar Pradesh, 1959 referred to several case laws to arrive at its conclusions. Some of the cases are as follows:

State of Bombay v. F.N. Balsara, 1951

This case was significant in determining the extent of the State’s power to legislate on matters in the concurrent list and the concept of repugnancy between State and central laws. This case was referred to discuss the doctrine of pith substance in the context of legislative competence. In the Deep Chand vs. State of Uttar Pradesh 1959, the Supreme Court of India used the Balsara judgement to illustrate the principles governing the determination of whether a law relates to a subject in one list or another in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. In Deep Chand’s judgement, the reference to the Balsara case helped in understanding the extent to which a State law can operate without encroaching upon the Union List and the powers of the Parliament. It was an important precedent to determine the repugnancy between State and Central laws, especially in cases where both have legislated on a subject within the Concurrent List.

Tika Ramji v. the State of Uttar Pradesh, 1956 

This case dealt with the issues of repugnancy and the doctrine of pith and substance in the context of State and central legislative powers. This case was significant as it dealt with the constitutional validity of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953. In the Deep Chand case, the reference to the Tika Ramji case helped the judges to analyze the extent to which a State law operates without encroaching upon the Union List and the powers of the Parliament.

Saghir Ahmad v. the State of Uttar Pradesh, 1955 

This case was pivotal in discussing the State’s power to nationalise certain industries and services, which was relevant to the issues in the case of Deep Chand. The judgement of the case of Saghir Ahmad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh became an important reference point in the Deep Chand vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1959, the case for understanding the limits of State power in regulating trade and commerce under Article 301 of the Constitution and the concept of freedom of trade is subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(6).

Conclusion

Disputes frequently occur when there are overlapping laws from both the central and State governments within a particular area. These issues may occur when either the Union or a State unlawfully encroaches upon the domain of the other’s legislation. Disputes can also emerge in the absence of a direct encroachment upon each other’s jurisdiction. Legal conflicts can emerge when both Union and State laws pertain to the same subject matter. Sometimes, the State legislation becomes inoperative because it irreconcilably clashes with the Union law.

The Supreme Court determined that the enactment of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1956 by Parliament did not render the U.P. Transport Service Act completely invalid under Article 254(1) of the Constitution. Rather, the Act remained in force, upholding the transportation scheme that had been established under it. The Court opined that even if the Central Act were to be interpreted as repealing the U.P.Act under the provisions of Article 254(2), this would not nullify the transportation scheme that was already in place under the U.P.Act. This scheme was protected by the saving clauses found in Section 6 of the General Clauses Act. The Court affirmed that the U.P.Act was not in violation of Article 31 of the Constitution prior to its amendment in 1955. Specifically, Section 11(5) of the U.P.Act was highlighted for ensuring the provision of fair compensation.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

When does a law made by the State legislature hold ascendancy over the Parliamentary law?

A law made by a State legislature can hold ascendancy over a Parliamentary law in the context of India’s federal structure under certain conditions as outlined in Article 254 of the Constitution of India. According to Article 254(1), if any provision of a law made by the State legislature is repugnant to a provision of a law made by Parliament which Parliament is competent to enact, then the law made by Parliament, whether passed before or after the law made by the State legislature, shall prevail and the law made by the State shall, to the extent of the repugnancy, be void.

However, there is an exception under Article 254(2), which states that if the State law has been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his assent, then the State law may prevail in that state. Nevertheless, even in such a case, Parliament can again override the State law by subsequently making a law on the same matter.

How did Article 254 of the Constitution play a role in this case?

Article 254 of the Indian Constitution concerns the repugnancy between laws made by Parliament and laws made by State legislatures. The court examined whether the State law was rendered void due to the ensuing central law.

What was the importance of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 in this judgement?

Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 was notable because the scheme previously encompassed by the U.P.Act was upheld, even though the central law could be construed as an annulment of the U.P. Act.

References


Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Download Now

Blanket immunity : how anticipatory bail undermines justice

0
bail

This article was written by Chitra, pursuing a Diploma in Advanced Contract Drafting, Negotiation, and Dispute Resolution from LawSikho, and edited by Koushik Chittella.

This article has been published by Shashwat Kaushik.

Introduction

A recent judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Directorate of Enforcement vs. Niraj Tyagi highlighted the issue of pre-arrest bail orders granting complete immunity from arrest. In this case, the Apex Court expressed concern over a judgement of the Allahabad High Court providing blanket protection to Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. and others against police investigation and arrest. The Apex Court vehemently dissuaded the High Court from passing such blanket orders restraining the arrest without the accused applying for the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

A pre-arrest bail providing immunity to a person from arrest has been a matter of contention in the Indian legal system for a long time now. The Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgements and various judicial precedents emphasise the importance of adhering to the legal framework of anticipatory bail and avoiding practices like “blanket bail” that undermine the principles of justice and law. In this article, we shall understand the concepts of blanket protection and blanket pre-arrest bail in the context of anticipatory bail with the help of judicial precedents. 

Anticipatory Bail

The term “anticipatory bail” is not defined in any statute. The legal provision referring to anticipatory bail is provided under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It empowers individuals to seek bail before arrest, i.e., it allows an accused to apply for bail in anticipation of arrest for a specific non-bailable offence. Anticipatory bail is discretionary and can be granted by the Sessions Court and the High Court. There are several factors, such as the nature and gravity of the offence and the antecedents of the accused, among others, that are to be considered while granting pre-arrest bail.

Need for Anticipatory Bail

In its 41st Report, the Law Commission of India highlighted that influential people can manipulate the legal system by fabricating charges against their rivals to disgrace them or to get them detained behind bars. Moreover, there is no justification for mandatorily putting a person who meets all the compulsory requirements of bail behind bars to invoke the provisions of bail.

Blanket Bail

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has directed the High Courts in several cases to refrain from issuing complete immunity against arrest. Such pre-arrest bail orders granting complete protection are often called ‘blanket bail’. Blanket bail, therefore, is a concept granting absolute immunity against any kind of arrest, covering all potential offences, including those arising from future FIRs. It at times offers blanket protection against anticipated offences that may not even have been registered.

How is blanket bail different from anticipatory bail

Blanket bail is not a recognised legal concept. Unlike anticipatory bail, which is provided in the CrPC, there is no legal provision for ‘blanket bail’. Anticipatory bail protects individuals who apprehend arrest for a specific offence they may have been accused of. However, the concept of ‘blanket bail’ refers to a hypothetical scenario where an individual would be immune from arrest for any future offence, regardless of its nature. It is to be noted that the concept of ‘blanket bail’ is not a recognised legal concept.

Landmark judgements

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has passed several judgements illustrating the ambit of the High Court’s discretionary powers in the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and directing the High Courts to refrain from passing blanket orders of bail. It has clearly laid down in its judgements that the order for anticipatory bail should not be a “blanket order” and that it must not enable the accused to commit further offences and claim the relief of indefinite protection from arrest. A few of them are discussed below. 

Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab

There is one crucial condition laid down under Section 438(1) of the Code that has to be satisfied before the grant of anticipatory bail. The applicant must have a “reason to believe ” that he may be arrested for a non-bailable offence, and his belief must be based on reasonable grounds. It is crucial to note here that mere ‘fear’ is not ’belief’ and so it would not be enough on the part of the applicant to plead that he has a vague apprehension that someone is going to accuse him, in pursuance of which he may get arrested. It is further laid down in the case that an order under Section 438 is a tool to protect the liberty of an individual but not a passport to commit a crime or a shield against accusations.

Vaman Narayan Ghiya vs. State of Rajasthan (2009) 

The Hon’ble Court, while rejecting the bail in the instant case, held that the reason to believe must satisfy the Court and guide it towards the requirement of anticipatory bail. The reason to believe the requirement of bail does not depend on mere suspicion of arrest; rather, it depends on the actual facts and circumstances. The accused must present some reasonable facts to the court, which might help the court in analysing the importance of granting anticipatory bail in the case.

Savitri Agarwal & Ors vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr

In this case, the Apex Court cautioned the High Courts against passing any blanket order of protection while granting bail. The Apex Court made it clear that when a High Court passes orders granting anticipatory bail, it should mention the specific offences for which the bail is granted. It was also laid down in the judgement that the High Courts should also impose conditions that can ensure uninterrupted police investigations.

Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. the State of Maharashtra

This is one of the important judgements when it comes to blanket bail. In this case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had directed the High Courts to abstain from passing orders, refraining the investigative agencies from arresting or “no coercive steps to be taken” pending the investigation as it would prevent the investigating agencies from carrying on their duties laid down by the law. The Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that the High Courts can’t pass such orders, which act as a blanket order protecting an accused in cognizable offences and thus, defeating the investigation powers of the investigative agencies. This is also because granting such interim protection from arrest would then amount to an order of anticipatory bail, which would surpass the conditions prescribed under CrPC’s Section 438.  

The Kerala High Court in the State of Kerala vs. Ansar stated that it is not correct to pass blanket orders of bail against all sorts of accusations in cases where no crime is registered.

Section 482 CrPC and Anticipatory Bail 

The High Courts have been conferred with very wide inherent powers, including inherent power with no statutory limitation under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. These powers of the High Court are preserved to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court and to secure the ends of justice. However, in recent developments, it has been observed that the High Courts sometimes overstep their powers provided under this section. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has given clear instructions to the High Courts that they can’t use the ambit of their powers under Section 482 of the CrPC to grant anticipatory bail or any blanket protection while the Court is dismissing the petition for the quashing of the FIR as it would amount to misuse of their powers. 

State of Telangana v. Hamid Abdullah Jeelani

In the given case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed an order that, while refusing to exercise the powers provided under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash the investigation, the High Courts can’t restrain the investigating agency from arresting the accused persons during the investigation. This kind of order would curtail the statutory rights of the investigative agencies.

Ravuri Krishna Murthy v. State of Telangana

The Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated its previous decision in this case and made it clear that the High Courts cannot issue a blanket order to protect the accused from arrest while dismissing a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC. 

Conclusion 

Anticipatory bail granting blanket protection to an accused is a serious concern as it interferes with the law and causes a miscarriage of justice. Anything that obstructs the normal course of the criminal justice mechanism is a matter of serious deliberation. This type of blanket protection may act as a licence for the commission of the crime in some cases where the accused is now immune from arrest and given a special lease concerning the investigation procedure. Furthermore, it is unjustified for the judiciary to interfere with the normal course of work of the investigative agencies. The Code of Criminal Procedure grants certain statutory rights to police and other agencies so that they are well-equipped to investigate in an unrestrained manner, but when the judicial authorities start overriding these statutory provisions in the name of blanket protection, the very basis of the justice system will be overridden, and one party will get an undue advantage in such cases. So, the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s concern over this trend of providing blanket protection from arrest is very much justified, and it is in the best interest of the public to abide by the Supreme Court’s instance on this matter.

Download Now

How to keep your applicant and employee data secure : everything HR should know

0
Data framework

This article has been written by Barnali Ghosh pursuing a Diploma in Business English Communication for International Professionals and Remote Workers from Skill Arbitrage.

This article has been edited and published by Shashwat Kaushik.

Introduction

As an HR employee, it is very important that you know what data security means. This is just that kind of place where all the confidential and sensitive information of every employee is stored. It holds information like addresses, social security numbers, bank account details and a whole lot more. This is kind of a treasure trove for every HR department of every company. Thus, it is their prerogative to keep their sensitive information safeguarded. This ensures that the company complies with all the data security regulations of the land. As a result, the company’s reputation is upheld and this is very important for the organisation as well. 

What is employee data

Now, for all that, it is essential to know what employee data is. What does it comprise, and why is it important for proper preservation? Employee data, in all reality, is that information that includes contact details, employment history, benefits, payroll information, attendance and performance records, and any other record that is vital for the proper operation of the particular organisation where the employee is hired. Thus, it can easily be gauged why such information and its secure preservation are of such importance. 

Security of employee data

It is important that every organisation and its owner secure their employee’s data. Here, we will walk through some of the most vital reasons why their data security is of utmost importance.

Legal and ethical commitments

It is important ethically and legally to safeguard all information pertaining to employees of an organisation. It is important not only because the law of the land demands it but also because it is morally right. Every individual has the right to have his/her privacy protected by the organisation that they are working for, as they are required to share some sensitive data just as the contract begins. 

If the company fails to protect such sensitive data, they are in severe trouble with the law of the land. They cannot allow any unauthorised access to all this information, no matter what the situation demands. It may result in costly legal hassles and financial losses, in combination with the reputation of the firm. Thus, in view of this, every firm would go the extra mile to safeguard all information.

Here we might as well quote some examples where some major corporate giants suffered colossal losses from breaches in the data security of their companies. Target in 2013 saw hackers steal the information of over 40 million customers and confidential records of over 70 million employees. Yahoo suffered two setbacks separately in 2013 and 2014, wherein 3 billion users worldwide had their account details compromised. Anthem Inc. saw the information of 80 million employees exposed in 2015. Even Marriott International had its Starwood guest reservation database rubbed along in 2014. So this employee data transgression and dereliction are not new in the history of mankind.

Regular security audits

Regular security audits should be a mandate for every organisation in view of employee data security. It should be conducted as often as once a year and if possible, even more. This system should comply with all the internal criteria of the company as well as the external ones imposed by the law of the land.

In this audit, all the susceptibilities and dangers should be identified and made secure. However, it is important to note here that there is no universal audit system that will fit in for every company. Each has its own unique features and systems that must be dealt with appropriately. For this, the following points should be checked:

  • Audit criteria should be carefully chosen
  • A checklist must be in place to ensure only authorised people are accessing this confidential data cache
  • All weak points are to be identified and penetration tests are to be conducted

Restricted access or user-specific access

Access should be restricted to only authorised people in this regard. Authorisation in specific areas should be the mandate of every company. Say, for instance, that only managers who have to review the attendance and performance of employees should be allowed there and no one else. They should not get access to other information, like the medical history of an employee or their confidential bank details. That access has to be given to another person, who should again not have access to other information. Even authorised people should be made to get authorisation for individual applications. 

To reach this goal, there should be an access record wherein all the passwords, biometrics and other details should be entered. This will help the company have records in case of an emergency and seamlessly trace the culprit if the need arises. 

Proper disposal of records

There is a retention period for all records, as per the law of the land. After that period terminates, the employers must dispose of all those records so that they cannot be read or regenerated. This can be done by various means and methods that include pulverising, burning or even shredding those records. However, destruction means are limited to these methods only; the employers can choose whatever means they like so long as the records are disposed of. If it is an electronic record, the right person should be contacted to take over the task of disposal. That person has to be trustworthy and reputed or it may stand a chance of falling into the wrong hands. 

Provision of adequate training

Every individual in charge of such high security and confidential matters should be trained and mentored on the right methods. They should be well-versed with the company’s laws and policies so that they do not make mistakes even unintentionally, because that costs a lot for both the employee and the employer. They should be trained on how to mitigate unauthorised access and make quick responses in case of security lapses. They should be trained on how to identify and track hackers and thieves.

Minimisation of data

Only information that is absolutely essential for the running of the show should be collected and preserved. That means the minimum amount of data is to be stored. It may be a difficult process because it all depends on how much a potential candidate can reveal or divulge in their cover letter and CV. There are certain checks and measures that are undertaken for certain candidates. It must very strictly be restricted to only people who absolutely need to go through them. So, to keep things under control, the HR department must know the purpose of data collection and adhere to it. This ensures the minimum collection of data. The company should also know the length of time they are required to preserve that data. If that time limit is exceeded, then the organisation might be in for a heavy penalty, which is not desired at all. This affects the reputation of the company as well.

Here, it is noteworthy to pay heed to the fact that recently, Amazon was penalised for historical privacy sabotage by retaining the data of children in spite of being asked to delete it. So, no company has any reason to believe that they are above the laws and directives of the land.

Precise and valid tech support is the right way to secure data

If a company has all the certifications that are required for it to function and operate, it means they are up-to-date with all the laws of the land. This also means they have a rightfully secure data usage and storage. These are aspects that must be paid heed to by every owner and it is in their best interest that they do so. This ensures that the software that they are using to secure their data is strong and steadfast. 

Being a technology-compliant company, after all, pays off for every owner or employer. They are naturally free of all the security breaches and lapses that they might otherwise face. In this regard, it is equally vital to remember that the technology should be upgraded from time to time. This ultimately goes a long way towards protecting employee data, keeping it secure and preventing the employer from having to go through sleepless nights tossing and turning in their beds. 

If data is stored in encrypted databases or secure servers, then there is every chance that they might prevent security lapses. This means that they can be stored both on-site and in the cloud storage system. 

Again, there are certain tools like multifactor authentication, firewalls, data encryption, automated threat detection systems, antivirus and anti-malware software that can be used for high security purposes. In this respect, all employees and people related to data access and usage should use passwords that are very strong and not very easy to decode by hackers who can hack into absolutely any password. This again helps secure employee data.

Guide to keeping organisation’s applicant and employee data secure

  1. Data security policy:
    • Develop and implement a robust data security policy that outlines the organisation’s approach to safeguarding sensitive information.
    • Include guidelines on data access, storage, retention, and disposal.
  2. Access controls:
    • Implement multi-factor authentication for all HR systems, including applicant tracking software and payroll systems.
    • Restrict access to sensitive data to authorised personnel on a need-to-know basis.
    • Monitor and regularly review user access privileges.
  3. Encryption:
    • Encrypt all sensitive data at rest and in transit, including personal information, financial data, and medical records.
    • Use strong encryption algorithms and key management practices.
  4. Data retention and disposal:
    • Establish clear data retention policies and procedures.
    • Regularly review and delete outdated or unnecessary data in accordance with legal requirements and your organisation’s policies.
    • Use secure disposal methods, such as shredding or erasing, to prevent unauthorised access to discarded data.
  5. Employee training:
    • Conduct regular security awareness training for employees, including proper password management, phishing identification, and reporting procedures.
    • Emphasise the importance of protecting sensitive information and the consequences of mishandling it.
  6. Physical security:
    • Ensure physical access to HR records is restricted to authorised personnel.
    • Implement access control measures, such as key cards or biometric scanners, to secure sensitive areas.
    • Monitor and record all entries and exits to these areas.
  7. Incident response plan:
    • Develop and maintain an incident response plan that outlines the steps to be taken in the event of a data breach or security incident.
    • Establish a clear chain of command and communication protocols.
    • Regularly test and update the plan to ensure its effectiveness.
  8. Compliance:
    • Ensure compliance with relevant data protection laws and regulations.
    • Regularly review and update your data protection practices to stay compliant.
  9. Regular security audits:
    • Conduct regular security audits to assess the effectiveness of your data security measures.
    • Identify and address any vulnerabilities or weaknesses in your security infrastructure.
  10. External vendors:
    • Evaluate the data security practices of any third-party vendors or service providers that process or store your organisation’s applicant or employee data.
    • Ensure they adhere to strict data protection standards and have appropriate security measures in place.
  11. Continuous monitoring:
    • Continuously monitor your systems for suspicious activities, such as unauthorised access attempts or data breaches.
    • Implement security monitoring tools and conduct regular log reviews to detect and respond to potential threats promptly.
  12. Incident reporting:
    • Establish clear procedures for reporting data security incidents, including to affected individuals and relevant authorities.
    • Investigate incidents thoroughly and take appropriate corrective actions.

By following these best practices, HR professionals can effectively protect their organisation’s applicant and employee data, maintain compliance, and build trust with their stakeholders.

Conclusion

With this entire ruckus about data protection and privacy laws, it measures up well to the fact that the future belongs to the automation of data storage, privacy and security. Without it, one cannot even imagine functioning properly, as nothing is done manually these days. Gone are those days when registers and log books were stored in vaults and high-security areas with guards guarding them like they were guarding a piece of treasure. Thus, it is important that there be automation of such important matters. And this can only be done with strong security systems operating in companies with proper audits and vigilance at regular intervals. There should also be an upgrade in technology. Most importantly, they should be a law-compliant company that ensures that nothing can go wrong where employee data security and storage are concerned. It becomes the moral, ethical and legal duty of the employee to protect every single employee working under their banner. 

References

Download Now

Safai Karmachari Andolan and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors. (2014) 

0

This article is written by Almana Singh. It deals with a thorough analysis of the judgement given in the case of Safai Karmachari Andolan and Ors. v. Union of India concerning its facts, issues raised, arguments made, as well as the concerned legal provisions of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, and the Constitution of India. 

It has been published by Rachit Garg.

Introduction

As of December 5, 2023, the written reply by the Minister of State for Social Justice and Empowerment, Mr. Ramdas Athawale, revealed a significant development in India’s fight against manual scavenging: out of 766 districts across the country, 714 have declared themselves free from this degrading practice of manual scavenging. This practice was outlawed in India under the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, and has been a longstanding issue addressed by the courts, notably in the case of Safai Karmchari Andolan v. Union of India (2014). In this pivotal case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court issued guidelines for the full implementation of the said Act, shedding light on the challenges and injustices faced by manual scavengers. 

This article delves into the facts, issues raised, arguments presented, and judgement rendered in the Safai Karmchari case, aiming to provide a comprehensive understanding of the struggle against manual scavenging in India.

Details of the case 

  1. Case name: Safai Karmachari Andolan and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.
  2. Petitioners: Safai Karmachari Andolan and Ors.
  3. Respondent: Union of India and Ors.
  4. Court: Supreme Court of India
  5. Type and case no.: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 583 of 2003 with Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 132 of 2012 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 583 of 2003
  6. Date of Judgement: 27 March 2014
  7. Bench: The then Chief Justice of India, P. Sathasivam, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, and Justice N.V. Ramana
  8. Equivalent citations: (2014) 11 SCC 224; AIR 2014 SC (SUPP) 280; [2014] 4 SCR 197; 2014 SCC OnLine SC 262
  9. Provisions and statutes involved: Articles 14, 17, 21, 32, and 47 of the Constitution of India and Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.

Facts of Safai Karmachari Andolan and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors. (2014) 

In December 2003, the Safai Karamchari Andolan, in collaboration with six other civil society organisations and seven individuals from the manual scavenging community, filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) under Article 32 of the Constitution. Petitioners requested a writ of mandamus directing the Union of India, State Government, and Union Territories to strictly enforce the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993. They are also seeking the enforcement of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 17, 21, and 47 of the Constitution of India. Petitioners sought to direct the respondents to adopt and implement the Act to formulate detailed plans, on a time-bound basis, for the complete eradication of the practice of manual scavenging and rehabilitation of persons engaged in such practice. 

Background

The inhumane practice of manually removing night soil, which entails using bare hands, brooms, or metal scrapers to clean human excrement from dry toilets, is commonly known as “manual scavenging” and remains widespread in India. Surveys conducted by petitioners in the present case estimate that over 12 lakh manual scavengers are still undertaking this inhumane practice. Official statistics from the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment for the years 2002-2003 report the number of identified manual scavengers at 6,76,009. Of these, 95% are Dalits (persons belonging to Scheduled Castes), who are forced to perform this degrading work under the guise of a “traditional occupation”. 

A sub-committee of the task force established by the Planning Commission in 1989 estimated that there were 72.05 lakh dry latrines in the country. The National Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Finance and Development Corporation was set up in February 1989, including Safai Karamcharis, for their economic development. The Government of India created the “Low-Cost Sanitation for the Liberation of Scavengers” Scheme in 1989. This centrally sponsored scheme aims to eliminate manual scavenging by converting existing dry latrines into low-cost, water-pour flush latrines and constructing new sanitary latrines. To eliminate this practice, the “National Scheme of Liberation and Rehabilitation of Scavengers and Their Dependents” was launched by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment in March 1992, aiming to identify, liberate, and rehabilitate scavengers. Following the recommendations from the National Seminar on Rural Sanitation in September 1992, the Government of India adopted a new strategy in March 1993. The focus shifted towards the provision of hygiene latrines, which involved building individual ones for households below the poverty line. These households received subsidies covering up to 80% of the Rs. 2500 unit cost. In 1993, Parliament passed the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act. The Act passed in July 1993 and remained inactive for three and a half years before being enforced in 1997. Initially, it applied to the states of Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Tripura, West Bengal, and all Union Territories. The other states were expected to adopt the Act later by passing a resolution under Article 252 of the Constitution. 

However, the National Commission for Safai Karamcharis, a statutory body, reported in its combined 3rd and 4th Reports that the 1993 Act was not being implemented effectively. They estimated that there were 96 lakh dry latrines and 5,77,228 manual scavengers in the country. They also noted that manual scavengers were being employed in military engineering works, the army, public sector undertakings, and Indian Railways. In 2003, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) submitted a report evaluating the National Scheme for Liberation and Rehabilitation of Scavengers and Their Dependents. The conclusion was that the scheme had failed to achieve its objective after 10 years and an investment of over Rs 600 crore. The report highlighted the lack of coordination between “liberation” and “rehabilitation,” and there was no evidence that those liberated were rehabilitated.

Laws involved in Safai Karmachari Andolan and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors. (2014)

Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 

The provisions of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the 2013 Act” or “the Act”) have been explained chapter-wise below for thorough perusal.

Objectives of the Act

The purpose of this Act is to prohibit the employment of manual scavengers, ensure the rehabilitation of manual scavengers and their families, and address related matters. It is founded on the principle of promoting fraternity and assuring the dignity of every individual, as outlined in the Preamble of the Constitution. The Act aims to rectify the historical injustices and indignities endured by manual scavengers, striving to rehabilitate them into lives of dignity. 

Chapter I

Chapter I of the Act includes, among other things, definitions of terms such as “hazardous cleaning”, “insanitary latrine,” and “manual scavenger” as outlined in Sections 2(1)(d), 2(1)(e), and 2(1)(g), respectively. 

The term “manual scavenger” refers to a person who is employed, either at the commencement of this Act or at any time after, to manually clean, carry, dispose of, or handle human excreta. This includes working in insanitary latrines, open drains, pits, railway tracks, or other places specified by the central or state government before the excreta has fully decomposed. The employer may be an individual, a local authority, an agency, or a contractor. 

The explanation of Section 2(1)(g) encompasses both regular and contractual work. Additionally, a person who cleans excreta using devices and protective gear specified by the Central Government is not classified as a “manual scavenger.”

Chapter II 

Chapter II of the Act outlines provisions for identifying insanitary latrines. Section 4 delineates the responsibilities of local authorities, which are as follows:

  1. Conduct a survey of insanitary latrines within its jurisdiction and publish a list of them within two months from the commencement of this Act. 
  2. Notify the occupiers of these insanitary latrines within 15 days of publishing the list, requiring them to demolish or convert these latrines into sanitary ones within six months from the commencement of this Act. This period can be extended by up to three months if there are sufficient reasons recorded in writing. 
  3. Construct the necessary number of sanitary community latrines within nine months from the commencement of this Act in areas where insanitary latrines have been identified.

Chapter III 

Chapter III of the Act includes provisions for prohibiting insanitary latrines and the employment or engagement of manual scavengers. Sections 5, 6, and 7 address these matters. 

Section 5 says, notwithstanding any conflicting provisions of the 1993 Act, no one can construct an insanitary latrine. No one can employ or engage a manual scavenger, directly or indirectly. Anyone currently employed must be immediately discharged from such duties. 

  1. Every insanitary latrine existing at the commencement of this Act must be demolished or converted into a sanitary latrine by the occupier at their own expense within the period specified in Section 4(1)(b). If there are multiple occupiers of an insanitary latrine, the responsibility to demolish or convert it lies with:
    1. The owner of the premises, if one of the occupiers is the owner; and 
    2. All occupiers, jointly and individually, in all other cases. 
  2. On failure to comply with guidelines, the local authority will issue a notice to either convert or demolish the latrine. The cost will be recovered from the occupier as prescribed. 

Section 6 states that any contract, agreement, or other arrangement made prior to the commencement of this Act that involves employing someone as a manual scavenger will be terminated when this Act commences. These contracts become void, and no compensation will be provided for their termination. Despite the above, no full-time manual scavenger will be removed from their duty. Their employer must keep them on, if they are willing, with at least the same pay and give them other types of work that do not involve manual scavenging. 

Section 7 stipulates that no individual, local authority, or agency shall, from the date specified by the State Government, which must not exceed one year from the Act’s commencement, directly or indirectly engage or employ any person for the hazardous cleaning of a sewer or a septic tank. 

Section 8 and Section 9 provide penal provisions of the Act. 

  1. Section 8 states that anyone who violates the provisions of Section 5 or Section 6 shall, for the first offence, be subject to imprisonment for a term of up to one year or a fine of up to Rs. 50,000 or both. For any subsequent offence, the punishment may include imprisonment for up to two years, a fine of up to Rs. 1,00,000, or both. 
  2. Section 9 specifies that anyone who contravenes the provisions of Section 7 shall, for the first offence, face imprisonment for up to 2 years, a fine of up to Rs. 2,00,000, or both. For any subsequent offence, the punishment may include imprisonment for up to 5 years, a fine of up to Rs. 5,00,000, or both. 

Chapter IV 

Chapter IV of the Act encompasses provisions related to the identification of manual scavengers in both urban and rural areas, along with provisions for rehabilitation. 

Section 13 provides the rehabilitation process under which any person listed as a manual scavenger by the municipality will be rehabilitated. The procedure and other benefits are given below:

  1. Within one month, they will be provided with a photo identity card containing information about their dependent family members. Additionally, they will receive one-time cash assistance, as prescribed. 
  2. Their children will qualify for scholarships as per the relevant schemes offered by the central, state, or local governments. 
  3. They will be allocated a residential plot and offered financial assistance for house construction, or alternatively, provided with a house, contingent upon meeting eligibility criteria and expressing willingness, in accordance with pertinent schemes. 
  4. Either they or one of the adult members of his family will undergo training in a livelihood skill, receiving a monthly stipend of at least Rs. 3000 throughout the training duration, contingent upon meeting eligibility criteria and expressing willingness. 
  5. Given, subject to eligibility and willingness, subsidy and concessional loans for taking up an alternative occupation on a sustainable basis, in such a manner as may be stipulated in the relevant scheme of the Central Government, the State Government, or the concerned local authority.
  6. They will receive additional legal and programmatic support from the authorised governments. 

The District Magistrate is responsible for ensuring the rehabilitation of each manual scavenger as per the above provisions. The state governments or the District Magistrate may assign additional responsibilities to subordinate officers and municipal officers. 

Criminal litigation

Chapter V 

Chapter V of the Act addresses the implementing mechanism of the provisions enshrined under this Act. 

  • Section 17 states that regardless of any other existing laws, every local authority is responsible for ensuring, through awareness campaigns or other means, that within nine months from the commencement of this Act, no insanitary latrines are constructed, maintained, or used within its jurisdiction. If this provision is violated, action must be taken against the occupier as per Section 5(3) of this Act. 
  • Section 18 stipulates that the appropriate government can assign the necessary powers and duties to local authorities and district magistrates to ensure the proper implementation of this Act. These authorities may then designate subordinate officers to exercise these powers and perform these duties within specified local limits. 
  • Section 19 outlines the responsibilities of the District Magistrate and authorised officers. They are required to ensure that no individual is engaged or employed as a manual scavenger within their jurisdiction. Additionally, they must prevent the construction, maintenance, use, or availability of insanitary latrines. It is their duty to ensure the rehabilitation of all manual scavengers identified under this Act in accordance with Section 13 or Section 16. Furthermore, they are tasked with investigating and prosecuting individuals who contravene the provisions of Sections 5, 6, or 7 under the provisions of this Act and ensuring compliance with all applicable provisions within their jurisdiction. 
  • Section 20 pertains to the appointment of inspectors and delineates their powers. The relevant government has the authority to appoint individuals deemed suitable to serve as inspectors for the enforcement of this Act. It can also specify the local boundaries within which these inspectors will wield their authority. 

Chapter VI

Chapter VI contains Sections 21, 22, and 23 and pertains to the procedure for trial in cases of non-compliance with the provisions of this Act. 

Section 21 says the State Government can authorise an Executive Magistrate to act as a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class for trying offences under this Act. Once empowered, the Executive Magistrate will be considered a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class for the purposes of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 

Section 22 says every offence under this Act will be cognizable and non-bailable.

Section 23 deals with offences committed by companies. If a company commits an offence under this Act, the person in charge of the company’s business at the time of the offence, along with the company itself, will be considered guilty and can be punished. If it is proven that the offence occurred with the consent, connivance, or negligence of any director, manager, secretary, or officer of the company, they will also be held responsible and punished accordingly. The term “company” refers to any corporate body or association of individuals, and in the case of a firm, “director” refers to a partner in the firm. 

Chapter VII 

Chapter VII deals with the establishment of the Vigilance and Monitoring Committee.

  • Section 24 states that each state government is required, by notification, to establish a Vigilance Committee for every district and sub-division. Each district’s Vigilance Committee must include the District Magistrate as the chairperson, serving ex-officio.
  • Section 25 pertains to the functions of the Vigilance Committee. It is to provide advice to the District Magistrate or, where applicable, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate on necessary actions to ensure proper implementation of the provisions of this Act or any rules established under it. It is tasked with overseeing the economic and social rehabilitation of manual scavengers and coordinating the efforts of all relevant agencies to facilitate sufficient financial support for the rehabilitation of manual scavengers. 
  • Similarly, Sections 26 and 27 provide for the formation and functions of the State Monitoring Committee, and Sections 29 and 30 provide for the Central Monitoring Committee. 
  • Section 31 provides the functions of the National Commissions of Safai Karamcharis, which are as follows:
  1. Monitor the implementation of this Act.
  2. Investigate complaints concerning violations of the provisions of this Act and communicate its findings to the relevant authorities along with recommendations necessitating further action. 
  3. Offer advice to the central and state governments to ensure the effective implementation of the provisions of this Act.
  4. Take suo-moto notice of matters relating to the non-implementation of this Act. 

Chapter VIII 

Chapter VIII of the Act encompasses miscellaneous provisions. Section 33 outlines the obligation of local authorities and other agencies to utilise modern technology for cleaning sewers, among other tasks. Section 36 stipulates that the relevant government must, within a period not exceeding three months, establish rules to facilitate the implementation of the Act. Section 37 mandates the Central Government to publish rules through notification for the guidance and utilisation by the state governments.

Article 17 of the Constitution of India

Article 17 of the Indian Constitution unequivocally abolishes “untouchability” and prohibits its practice in any form. It further stipulates that the enforcement of any disability arising from “untouchability” shall be deemed an offence punishable according to the law. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the principal architect of the Indian Constitution, laid its foundation with a clear commitment to eradicating untouchability. He dedicated his entire life to uprooting this evil. 

However, it is unfortunate that, even after 74 years of enforcement of the constitution, the untouchability and evils of the caste system in the form of manual scavenging persist. 

Issues raised 

  1. Whether the practice of manual scavenging persists despite the implementation of the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993, and the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013?
  2. Whether the practice violates Article 17 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India? 

Arguments of the parties

Petitioners 

  1. Petitioners pointed out the uncertainty in the surveys conducted by the central government and by the petitioners with limited resources.
  2. Petitioners provided the Court with a survey report and contended that the practice of manual scavenging is still prevalent in India after the implementation of the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993.
  3. Petitioners contended that the practice of manual scavenging is violative of Articles 14, 17, 21, and 47 of the Constitution of India.

Respondents

The Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents cited a few features of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, which have been elaborated under the heading “Laws involved”.

Judgement in Safai Karmachari Andolan and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors. (2014)

In the case at hand, the judgement was authored by Chief Justice P. Sathasivam. The Court ruled in favour of the petitioners, directing both the union and state governments to ensure full implementation of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, and its accompanying rules, along with various directives issued by the Court. The authorities were instructed to take appropriate action in cases of non-implementation or violation of the provisions outlined in the 2013 Act. 

The problem of manual scavenging persists despite the implementation of the Act 

The Court affirmed that on several occasions it has directed the Union and State Governments to take steps towards the implementation of the Act. Various orders have gradually pushed the state governments to ratify the law and appoint executive authorities under the Act. The Court observed that, due to the immense pressure from the Court, in March 2013, the Central Government announced a “Survey of Manual Scavengers”. This survey, however, was confined only to 3546 statutory towns and did not extend to rural areas. According to the “Progress Report of the Survey of Manual Scavengers and Their Dependents” dated 27.02.2014, the state’s efforts have resulted in the identification of only a small fraction of individuals engaged in manual scavenging. The Court noted that, despite limited resources, the petitioners were able to identify 1098 individuals involved in manual scavenging in the State of Bihar. However, the official progress report dated 27.02.2014 has only managed to identify 136 individuals. In the state of Rajasthan, the petitioners identified 816 scavengers, whereas the official progress report of the state only identified 46. The data gathered by the petitioners strongly indicates that the practice of manual scavenging persists without interruption. Decades after the enactment of the 1993 Act, dry latrines still continue to exist. 

Violation of fundamental rights 

Citing Article 17 of the Constitution of India, which outlaws untouchability, the Court affirmed that manual scavenging, intrinsically tied to the caste system and untouchability, persists in India, contravenes constitutional provisions, and infringes upon the fundamental rights of the Indian citizens involved in this inhumane practice. The court then referred to several international conventions to which India is a signatory. The Court further cited conventions that prohibit the practice of manual scavenging, namely the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD)

The Court observed that, for over a decade, the Supreme Court had issued several directives and sought compliance from all States and Union Territories. As a consequence of the Court’s effective intervention, the Government of India enacted a statute, Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, to eliminate the practice of manual scavenging and support the welfare of scavengers. The Act received assent from the President on 18 September 2013. This new statute does not undermine the constitutional mandate of Article 17 or excuse the previous inaction by the governments under the 1993 Act. Instead, the 2013 Act reinforces the fundamental rights enshrined under Article 17 and Article 21 for those involved in sewage and tank cleaning, as well as those cleaning human excrement on railway tracks. The petitioner’s argument that the practice of manual scavenging contradicts the essence of fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution was upheld.

Guidelines given by the Supreme Court

The Court reaffirmed the provisions given under the 2013 Act and gave a set of guidelines for proper implementation of the same in Para 23 of the judgement. The Court observed that individuals listed as manual scavengers under Sections 11 and 12 of the 2013 Act must be rehabilitated in accordance with the provisions outlined in Chapter IV of the same Act.

Below are the guidelines outlined for thorough consideration,

  1. Provision of one-time cash assistance, as prescribed.
  2. Entitlement of their children to scholarships according to the relevant schemes of the Central Government, State Government, or local authorities, as applicable.
  3. Allocation of a residential plot and financial assistance for house construction, or provision of a ready-built house with financial assistance, subject to the manual scavenger’s eligibility and willingness as per the relevant scheme’s provisions. 
  4. Provision of training in livelihood skills for at least one family member, with a monthly stipend during the training period, subject to eligibility and willingness. 
  5. Provision of subsidies and concessional loans for at least one adult family member to pursue an alternative occupation sustainably, subject to eligibility and willingness as per the relevant scheme’s provisions. 
  6. Provision of other legal and programmatic assistance as notified by the central government or state government. 

The Court added that to eradicate the practice of manual scavenging and prevent future generations from engaging in this inhuman activity, the rehabilitation of manual scavengers must include:

  1. Sewer deaths: Entering sewer lines without safety gear should be criminalised, even in emergencies. In case of a sewer death, the family of the deceased should receive compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs. 
  2. Railways: A time-bound strategy should be implemented to end manual scavenging on the tracks. 
  3. Post-release support: Persons from manual scavenging should not face obstacles in receiving their legal entitlements. 
  4. Livelihood support for women: Safai Karmchari women should receive support for dignified livelihoods, in accordance with their chosen livelihood schemes. 

Identify the families of all individuals who died performing sewage work (in manholes and septic tanks) since 1993 and provide compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs for each death to dependent family members. The Court established that rehabilitation must be grounded in the principles of justice and transformation. 

Rationale behind the judgement

While ruling in favour of the petitioners, the Court referenced various international conventions and covenants to which India is a party or signatory, all of which prohibit the inhuman practice of manual scavenging. All of the provisions cited by the Court have been briefed below for a thorough perusal. 

The Court cites the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) references to the below-mentioned articles. 

  • Article 1: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They possess reason and conscience and should treat others with a spirit of brotherhood. 
  • Article 2: Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without any distinction based on race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinions, national or social origin, property, birth, or any other status. 
  • Article 23(3): Everyone who works has the right to fair and favourable remuneration that ensures a dignified existence for themselves and their family, supplemented, if necessary, by additional social protection measures. 

The Court, while citing the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), referred to Article 5(a), which is explained below.

Article 5(a) mandates that states take all necessary actions to alter the social and cultural behaviours of men and women, aiming to eliminate prejudices and practices that imply one sex is inferior or superior to the other or that reinforce traditional gender roles. 

The Court, while citing the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), referred to Article 2, which is explained below.

Article 2 obliges states to condemn racial discrimination and commit to eliminating it while promoting understanding among all races. To achieve this:

  1. Each state must review, amend, or abolish any laws and policies that create or sustain racial discrimination. 
  2. Each state must prohibit and eradicate racial discrimination by individuals, groups, or organisations, using legislation if necessary. 

The above provisions of international covenants, which have been ratified by India, are binding on India insofar as they are not inconsistent with provisions of domestic laws. 

Critical analysis of Safai Karmachari Andolan and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors. (2014)

The Supreme Court’s ruling in favour of the petitioners marks a significant step towards eradicating the inhumane practice of manual scavenging, described as an “obnoxious practice of manual scavenging across the country, a practice squarely rooted in the concept of the caste system and untouchability”. The judgement underscores the deep-seated issue of caste-based discrimination that perpetuates this practice, violating fundamental rights and various international conventions to which India is a signatory. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the father of the Indian Constitution, dedicated his life to eradicating untouchability, and this continuous manual scavenging undermines his efforts. The Court, in its capacity, reaffirmed the sentiments Ambedkar professed, which were integral to making the Constitution of India. 

The precedential value of the Safai Karmchari case can be seen in the judgement pronounced in the case of Rajeshwari v. State of Karnataka (2022), which deals with a series of petitions dealt with by the High Court of Karnataka. In this case, the citizens belonging to oppressed classes raised grievances over the non-implementation of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013. Despite assurances by the government and orders issued by the Managing Director of the Corporation, little progress was made in eradicating the dehumanising practice of manual scavenging. The Court, drawing on the precedent set in the Safai Karamchari Andolan case (2014), expressed deep concern over the delayed implementation of social welfare policies aimed at supporting marginalised communities. Citing the Supreme Court’s directive in the Safai Karamchari case, the Court emphasised the need for rigorous enforcement of legislative measures to ensure the eradication of manual scavenging and the rehabilitation of affected individuals. The Court’s decision underscores the urgency of addressing systemic issues and holding authorities accountable for failure to uphold fundamental rights. 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, the judgement in the case of Safai Karmachari Andolan and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. (2014) represents a pivotal moment in India’s legal landscape, addressing the entrenched issue of manual scavenging and the violation of the fundamental rights of manual scavengers. The Supreme Court’s ruling in favour of the petitioners highlights the legacy and principles upon which the Constitution of India was founded. The Court is directing both the state and union governments to fully implement the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013, in conjunction with the guidelines for rehabilitation given by the Supreme Court. This signifies a step towards eradicating and dehumanising manual scavenging. Through this judgement, the Court set a precedent for future legislation and reaffirmed its commitment to social justice and human dignity.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What does the term “manual scavenger” mean?

“Manual Scavenger” refers to a person who is employed, either at the start of this Act or at any time after, by an individual, local authority, agency, or contractor to manually clean, carry, dispose of, or handle human excreta. This includes working in insanitary latrines, open drains, pits, railway tracks, or other places specified by the central or state government before the excreta has fully decomposed. 

Is the practice of manual scavenging legal in India?

No, the practice of manual scavenging was considered inhumane and prohibited in India under a statutory enactment, the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.

What is the amount of compensation determined by the court in case of death of an individual involved in manual scavenging?

Initially, the Safai Karmchari case set the compensation for sewer deaths at Rs. 10 lakh, which was subsequently increased in the case of Dr. Balram v. Union of India (2023) to Rs. 30 lakh. 

References


Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Download Now

Dr. D. C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar (1986)

0

This article was written by Bhuvan Malhotra and further updated by Pruthvi Ramkanta Hegde. This article explains the facts, issues and judgement of the case of Dr. D.C. Wadhwa & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Ors (1986) based on an ordinance. The article also covers the overview of an ordinance and the power of the issuance of an ordinance by the Governor as enumerated under Article 213 of the Constitution of India.

Introduction

In any democratic country, the Constitution is like the rulebook that everyone must follow. It sets out how the government should work and what rights the citizens have. The Indian Constitution is considered a ‘mother law’ in India. The organs or wings of the Government, i.e., executive, legislature and judiciary, while making decisions, enacting any laws and pronouncing any judgments respectively, should ensure that the said functions are done in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of India. 

Normally, laws are made by the legislature, which is a group of elected representatives who debate and vote on them. However, there is a provision called an ordinance that allows the President or Governor to make laws without going through the usual legislative process. An ordinance is a temporary law that can be issued by the Governor or President when the legislature is not in session. It is meant to be used in emergencies or urgent situations when waiting for the legislature to meet and pass a law would be impractical. However, when these ordinances are repeatedly reissued without any changes for long periods of time, what may be the consequences? The same was discussed in the case of Dr. D. C. Wadhwa & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors. (1987) a discussion of which will be further elaborated in this article.

Details of Dr. D. C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar (1986) 

Name of the case 

Dr. D. C. Wadhwa & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors.

Date of Judgment

December 20, 1986

Supreme Court Bench

  1. The then Honourable Chief Justice of India, P.N. Bhagwati 
  2. Honourable Justice K.N. Singh
  3. Honourable Justice M.M. Dutt
  4. Honourable Justice  G.L. Oza
  5. Honourable Justice Ranganath Misra 

Parties to the case

Petitioner  

Dr. D.C Wadhwa & Ors 

Respondent 

State of Bihar & Ors

Equivalent citations

AIR 1987 SC 579, 1986/INSC/280, JT 1987 (1) SC 70, 1986 (2) SCALE 1174, (1987) 1 SCC 378, [1987] 1 SCR 798

Type of the case

Writ Petition Nos. 412-15 of 1984

Represented by

Petitioner

Advocates namely Soli J. Sorabjee, J.B. Dadachanji, Ravinder Narain, T.N. Ansari and Joel Peres.

Respondents

Advocates namely L.N. Sinha, Jai Narain, P.P. Singh, D. Goburdhan and Sushma Relan.

Author of the judgement

Justice P.N. Bhagwati

Court Name

Honourable Supreme Court of India

Related laws

Article 213 and Article 32 of the Constitution of India, 1950. 

Legal aspects surrounding Dr. D. C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar (1986)

Ordinance

Meaning

In general, an ordinance is a law issued by the President of India based on the recommendation of the Union Cabinet, when Parliament is not in session. Likewise, Governors of Indian states can also enact ordinances when the respective Legislative Assembly (or both the Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council, if it is a bicameral legislature) is not in session.

History of an ordinance

The history of ordinances in India began with the Government of India Act, 1919. Even though the term ‘ordinance’ was not used, this Act allowed laws to be made without the usual legislative process if the Governor’s council didn’t pass them. If the Governor thought a Bill was crucial and urgent for their duties, they could make it into law, even if the council disagreed. This set the stage for ordinances, which are temporary laws issued by the President or Governor when the legislature is not in session. They have since become common in India’s legal system, but are subject to certain rules and limitations. 

The Government of India Act, 1919 contains a provision in Section 13 that allows for the enactment of a Bill into law, even if it has not been passed by the Legislative Council. This provision comes into effect when the Governor’s Legislative Council refuses to introduce a Bill or fails to pass it in a form recommended by the Governor. In such cases, the Governor can certify that the passage of the Bill is essential for fulfilling their responsibilities regarding the subject matter. 

As a result, even if the council does not agree, the Bill will be considered as passed. Then, with the Governor’s signature, it can become a law. This law can either be exactly as it was first introduced or in a version that was suggested for the Council’s consideration. This provision lets laws be made without going through the normal steps of the legislative process.

Power of the Governor to promulgate Ordinances when the  State Legislature is not in session

Article 213 of the Indian Constitution deals with the Governor’s power to make laws called ordinances when the State Legislature is not in session. Article 213 states that:

  • If the Governor thinks urgent action is needed when the State Legislative Assembly (or both Houses if there is a Legislative Council) is not in session, he or she can issue ordinances.
  • The Governor cannot issue an ordinance if the President’s permission is needed for a similar law, or if the Governor would normally send such a law for the President’s consideration, or if a similar law would be invalid without the President’s approval.
  • Ordinances have the same power as laws passed by the State Legislature but they must be presented to the Legislative Assembly (or both Houses) and will expire after six weeks unless approved by the Legislature. The Governor can also cancel an ordinance at any time.
  • If an ordinance includes something that would not be allowed in a regular law passed by the legislature, that part of the ordinance becomes invalid. However, if the President instructed the Governor to issue the ordinance, it is treated as if the President had approved it after the legislature passed it.

Separation of power

The principle of separation of powers is a foundational structure of government where authority is distributed among several branches. Typically, in democratic nations, these branches are the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. This theory holds that in a free democracy, each branch should have clear and separate roles and responsibilities. They operate independently to prevent conflicts by ensuring that one branch does not interfere with the functions of the others. This means that the executive should not perform legislative or judicial duties, the legislature should not undertake executive or judicial tasks, and the judiciary should not engage in legislative or executive actions. This separation helps maintain a balance of power and prevents any one branch from becoming too dominant.

Facts of Dr. D. C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar (1986)

In Bihar, there was a common practice in which the government repeatedly re-issued ordinances without turning them into permanent laws through the legislature. After the State Legislature’s session ended, the same ordinances were reintroduced with the same content. Three specific ordinances which were challenged for this practice are:

  • Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Third Ordinance, 1983 This ordinance regulated the trade of forest produce in Bihar. It had rules about how forest products could be bought, sold, or transported.
  • Bihar Intermediate Education Council Third Ordinance, 1983 – This ordinance is related to the Bihar Intermediate Education Council. It has provisions regarding the functioning or management of intermediate education in Bihar.
  • Bihar Bricks Supply (Control) Third Ordinance, 1983 This ordinance dealt with the control of brick supply in Bihar. It contained regulations on how bricks were manufactured, distributed, or sold within the state.

All three of these ordinances were repeatedly reintroduced. However, the ordinances were reintroduced without being turned into permanent laws, which led to questioning the validity of these ordinances. 

In this case, the petitioner (1), Dr. D.C. Wadhwa was a professor of economics in Pune and had filed a PIL challenging the general power of the Governor to re-promulgate various ordinances by the Governor of Bihar. The petitioner had extensively researched and published about the misuse of the ordinance-making power of the Governor of Bihar because the Government of Bihar had promulgated 256 ordinances between 1967 and 1981 and these 256 ordinances were kept alive for periods ranging between one and fourteen years by mechanically re-promulgating the ordinances without changing any content of the ordinance or trying to turn it into an Act. 

Petitioners (2, 3, and 4) were individuals directly affected by the provisions of the ordinances mentioned above. Petitioner No. 2 was a farmer who grew forest produce on his land in a village called Anigara. He was affected by Clause (5) of the Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Third Ordinance, 1983. This ordinance restricted the sale of certain forest produce and created a state monopoly for their sale. Clause (7) of this ordinance allowed the government to set the prices at which it or authorised officers could buy forest produce from growers like Petitioner No. 2. These provisions limited his ability to sell his produce freely, so he was interested in challenging the constitutionality of the ordinance.

Petitioner No. 3 was a student studying in Intermediate (Science) Class at A.N. College, Patna, which was affected by the Bihar Intermediate Education Council Third Ordinance, which regulated aspects of their education. While the specifics of this ordinance are not discussed, it was clear that it affected or could potentially affect the rights of Petitioner No. 3, thus challenging its constitutionality.

Similarly, Petitioner No. 4 owned a brick manufacturing business called South Bihar Agency in Patna. They were impacted by the Bihar Brick Supply (Control) Third Ordinance, which gave the State Government control over various aspects of brick manufacturing and sales, including prices. These provisions affected the petitioner’s business, so they also challenged the constitutionality of this ordinance.

During the proceedings of the writ petitions, the provisions of two of the mentioned ordinances were enacted into law by the legislature. However, the third ordinance, i.e., the Bihar Intermediate Education Council Third Ordinance, 1983, was still in operation. There was a Bill incorporating its provisions that had been pending consideration before the State Legislature, which had been referred to the Select Committee for further evaluation.

The general power of the Governor to re-promulgate the ordinance was examined by the court as several ordinances had been re-promulgated over thirty times. The immediate challenge was to the three ordinances that were kept alive for a period of 10-14 years. 

Issues of the case

The main issue contested was whether the Governor could mechanically re-promulgate the ordinance for an indefinite period of time, and thus take over the power (from the legislature) to legislate through the powers conferred on him under Article 213. 

The issue in the case holds great constitutional law importance as the executive was taking over the power to legislate by way of re-promulgating the ordinances. This practice of the executive is a violation of the constitutional provision as every citizen has a right to be governed by laws made in accordance with the Constitution i.e., the legislature and not by-laws made by the executive.

Arguments framed

Respondents

The counsel representing the respondent argued against the writ petitions, stating that:

  • The petitioners do not have the right to bring these writ petitions because it was contended that the two ordinances had already been enacted into an Act of Parliament and the third ordinance was sent as a proposal to be enacted into an Act, thus the question was merely academic in nature
  • The petitioners, who are mainly outsiders, do not have a legal right to challenge the government’s practice of re-promulgating ordinances.
  • The issue raised in the court is only theoretical and should not be decided upon.
  • The court should not examine whether the Governor followed the necessary conditions before issuing the ordinance.

There were various arguments made by the respondents that the petitioners had no locus standi to maintain the writ petition since they were outsiders who had no legal interest in challenging the validity of the re-promulgation of the ordinances.

Petitioners

Petitioner’s side contended that as a citizen, he has the right to insist on being governed by laws that adhere to the Constitution, rather than laws made by the executive branch in violation of constitutional provisions. While he may not have the right to challenge a specific ordinance unless it directly affects him, he has the right to challenge the broader practice of Bihar repeatedly re-issuing ordinances without them being turned into laws by the legislature. It is clearly for the vindication of public interest”, and therefore, the petitioner should be allowed to maintain his writ petitions. 

However, after hearing these arguments, the court decided to allow the writ petitions.

Supreme Court’s observations in Dr. D. C. Wadhwa & Ors. vs. State of Bihar (1986)

The Honourable Supreme Court observed that the repetitive issuance of ordinances by the Bihar Government without seeking approval from the legislature, this practice is in violation of the constitutional framework.  Further, the Court looked at judicial decisions taken in past cases to back up its decision. 

They pointed out a rule from a case, K.C. Gajapati Narayana Deo & Ors. v. State of Orissa (1953), which says the judiciary should focus on what the government is actually doing, not just what it looks like they are doing. Furthermore, the Court made comparisons between the conduct of the President and the Governor in exercising ordinance powers. Despite possessing similar authority, the Court noted that the President had not engaged in the same practice of reissuing ordinances after their expiration. This observation, drawn from the case of P. Vajravelu Mudaliar v. Special Deputy Collector, Madras & Anr. (1964) underscored the irregularity and impropriety of the Governor’s actions. 

Further, the court acknowledges that the power given to the Governor to issue ordinances is like an emergency power, meant for situations when the legislature is not in session and immediate action is needed to address a pressing issue. It also emphasises that while the Governor has this power, the main authority for making laws lies with the legislature, not the executive. The Governor’s power to issue ordinances is a temporary measure to address urgent situations until the legislature reconvenes. Ordinances should have a limited duration and should not be used to bypass the legislature’s lawmaking function.

Critical analysis of the judgement

All these arguments were turned down by the court as the third ordinance, though presented as a proposal to the Parliament, was still in force. The Supreme Court held that the Governor can not just make new rules arbitrarily. They can only make temporary rules for emergencies, and these rules stop being valid when the Legislature meets again. 

The Court ruled that the Bihar Intermediate Education Council Ordinance, 1983, which is currently in effect, has been declared unconstitutional and. therefore, invalid. The law is not legally valid or binding because it goes against the provisions of the Constitution of India. Therefore, any actions or regulations done on the basis of this ordinance are considered legally invalid. 

The court further held that the act of the Governor is unconstitutional because it exceeds the Governor’s authority as outlined in the Constitution. The court further held that the executive branch in Bihar is acting like a legislature by making laws for extended periods without complying with constitutional limits. This behaviour is seen as improper and against the constitutional framework. 

The court ruled that instead of relying on ordinances for a prolonged period, the government should follow the proper legislative process by introducing Bills in the legislature to enact those provisions into law. The court also held that there must not be any Ordinance-Raj practice in the country accordingly; it’s saying that the executive should not overstep its boundaries by making laws for extended periods through ordinances and should instead work within the constitutional framework by involving the legislature in the law-making process. 

The Court further emphasised the importance of the rule of law in accordance with the Constitution of India. It states that all branches of the government, such as the legislature, executive, and any other authority, must operate within the ambit of constitutional limitations. If any branch of the government, particularly the executive, engages in practices that violate these constitutional limits, any member of the public (referred to as Petitioner No. 1) would have the right to challenge such practices by filing a writ petition. Furthermore, it is highlighted that it is the constitutional duty of the Supreme Court to consider and rule on the validity of such petitions.  

Issuing the ordinances is a special power confirmed by the Governor. It is meant for dealing with big problems quickly. But it shouldn’t be used for political reasons. The Governor can make temporary rules called ordinances when there’s an emergency and the regular law-making body, the legislature, is not meeting in session. Even though the legislature usually makes laws, in emergencies, the Governor can step in. However, every ordinance must be presented to the legislature, and it only lasts for six weeks after the legislature meets again unless the legislature agrees to keep it longer by enacting such an ordinance. This way, ordinances are only used when needed and for a limited time. Ordinances are only supposed to last for a short time, usually six weeks, to give the regular lawmakers a chance to make a proper law. If they don’t do it within that time, the ordinance expires. The government cannot keep reissuing the same ordinance without the legislature’s approval. When an ordinance is issued by the Governor to handle an urgent situation, it automatically expires after six weeks once the legislature meets again. If the government wants to keep those rules in place beyond that time, it must get the legislature’s approval. 

Another reason that made the court adjudicate upon this issue was that the court noted that the ordinances promulgated under Article 123 had never been re-promulgated till the pendency of this suit but the Government of Bihar was keeping alive various ordinances bypassing circulars which clearly directed various officials to mechanically re-promulgate the ordinances as soon as they expire. The maximum time an ordinance was re-promulgated was 39 times. 

In the end, the court ruled that the mechanical re-promulgation of the ordinances for a period of one to fourteen years without going to the legislature was a colourable exercise of power by the executive and ruled that the re-promulgation of ordinances was unconstitutional. It would be wrong for the Governor to ignore the legislature and keep reissuing the same ordinance because it would give them too much power and it violates the provisions of the Constitution, especially the power of the Governor as per Article 213. Regarding the role of the court, they cannot question whether the Governor felt satisfied when issuing an ordinance. But, in this case, the issue is not about the Governor’s satisfaction. It’s about whether the Governor has the power to keep re-issuing the same ordinance without getting the legislature involved. The answer is no, they cannot do that.

The judgement delivered by Bhagwati, J falls apart when the court says that there may be times when the parliament cannot deal with the promulgated ordinances because of a shortage of time. to 

Problems attached to the judgement

Of course, this was a faulty judgment for several reasons. One of the reasons, to begin with, is that the court did not go into the question of what would happen to the effects that have been made by these failed ordinances. Reconciling this case and T. Venkata Reddy’s case would essentially mean that the effects of such failed ordinances that are re-promulgated would remain as it is, though the ordinances re-promulgated have been declared unconstitutional in nature. Moreover, there is a false distinction in the scope of judicial reviewability between this case and T. Venkata Reddy’s case. Another counter effect was due to the problematic exceptions provided in the case as after the judgement, the re-promulgation of ordinances rather increased; 53 ordinances were re-promulgated between 1991 and 1993 and some were promulgated at least five times.

This case was subsequently also cited in the case of Krishna Kumar v. State of Bihar (2017) which dealt with various issues related to promulgation of ordinances and re-promulgation was also something that the court commented upon. The court in this case slightly differed from the view held in the case of D.C. Wadhwa by stating that re-promulgation of an ordinance is an unconstitutional practice; the ordinance should be mandatorily laid down in the parliament for the necessary debate to take place and not doing so would be an abuse of constitutional process. The difference was merely of the exceptions given in the D.C. Wadhwa case but it is suggestive from Justice Lokur’s opinion that the court did not explicitly overrule the D.C. Wadhwa case but rather only differed from it. So Krishna Kumar’s case seems to have left the answer to the practice of re-promulgation incomplete. 

Could the judgement be tackled in a better way

To answer the question of how D.C Wadhwa’s judgement could be tackled in a better way we must look at the intention of the members of the constitutional drafting assembly by exploring the arguments given at the time of drafting and incorporating such articles in the constitution, of what they wanted us to perceive of these articles. After which we can look at some other jurisdictions where such a power, as envisaged in Articles 123 and 213 is present and how these countries look at the exercise of re-promulgation of ordinances 

Constituent Assembly Debates

The ordinance-making power of the President and the governor are a legacy of the colonial past and the British decided to do away with this power to legislate but the drafting committee incorporated them as articles 123 and 213 in the Constitution. They were adopted from Sections 42 and 43 of the Government of India Act, 1935 which vested parallel legislative power in the Governor-General of India. These articles were severely criticised in the Constituent Assembly debates as they did not go well with the elected and the representative polity. 

The Constitution provides that an ordinance must be placed before the legislature within six weeks of its reassembly but the maximum duration of enforcement of such an ordinance would be about seven and a half months. The duration of an ordinance was highly criticised in the debates like H.V. Kamath felt that six weeks from the date of the reassembly was too long and was worried that a President inclined to dictatorship might take undue advantage of the articles. H.N. Kunzu also wanted something similar, instead of six weeks he advocated for four weeks. However, the most articulate voice against the ordinance was from K.T Shah who advocated for the ordinance to not last a minute longer than such extraordinary circumstances and also suggested for the ordinance to end as soon as the Parliament reassembled. The members hardly spoke against the very idea of the ordinance-making power but the discussions were limited to the nature and scope of the ordinance and what limits they could put on an ordinance Ambedkar disapproved of all these suggestions and the articles were incorporated as they stood today. According to Shubhankar Dam, Ambedkar was too trusting in the successive presidents to come and Ambedkar believed that because these articles envisage too much power in the executive, the successors would be too mindful and extremely cautious to use these provisions of the constitution and he also trusted that these provisions would be used only in the state of grave emergency and the executive would not let the ordinance to be in effect for an unduly long period of time. Also, the constituent assembly rejected the idea of a substantive limit on the ordinance-making power.

What could have been done

Firstly the exceptions given by Bhagwati J were not required if the court is itself calling the re-promulgation practice unconstitutional. The court rather than saying that the session might be too short for the legislators to deal with the ordinance could have instead suggested increasing the duration of the session to deal with the ordinance promulgated because the power or promulgation is contingent upon an emergent situation arising. If the legislators are not dealing with that emergent situation, this would mean that either the legislators are not competent to deal with such a problem or the problem in itself was not so emergent and could have waited for the next session to reconvene. 

The second thing that the court must have ensured is that no ordinance holding substantial similarity to an already expired or lapsed ordinance, must also not be promulgated. This becomes necessary looking at the number of years and number of times an ordinance has been re-promulgated. To explain with an example, let’s suppose that the state comes up with an ordinance penalising some criminal activity for a maximum of 14 years and it does not propose such an ordinance in front of the parliament to be enacted into an act rather after it has lapsed the state promulgates a new ordinance which penalises the same activity for 12 years. 

Looking at the two the state could easily argue that the two ordinances are different as the duration of punishment has been reduced so it isn’t re-promulgation of the lapsed ordinance but considering that the activity penalised by the ordinance is the same, the ordinance must be perceived as a re-promulgated one. The court also fails to comment upon what would happen to the effects created by such ordinances. Considering the fact that the re-promulgated ordinance has been declared as unconstitutional the court must have ruled that the effect of the ordinance shall be void ab initio in case it is withdrawn, or lapses. 

Suggestions

As suggested by the arguments given above, the main point of friction in these debates was the time period for which the ordinance would remain in effect. The intention to shorten the time period after the reassembly of the Parliament shows that the drafters didn’t want the people to be governed by the laws made by the executive which would be violative of the constitutional provisions for long. It is important to note that there was no debate about the re-promulgation of the ordinance which is evident as the process of re-promulgation is doing nothing but buying more time to the legislature to deal with the emergent situation. 

But the question becomes more complex in terms that, if the situation arose was really emergent that the legislators could not have waited for the next session of the state assembly or Parliament to begin, wouldn’t the first order of business of the session be dealing with the situation and trying to enact the promulgated ordinance into an Act of Parliament because promulgating an ordinance is just a temporary solution to the situation arisen as it still has not become an Act of the Parliament. 

A country like Brazil also has such a provision present in their constitution where the executive can promulgate ordinances and the constitution also allows the executive to re-promulgate the ordinance once after it lapses; after the ordinance lapses the second time the ordinance would automatically be converted into the law as it is. The only thing different in terms of the construction of the article in Brazil is that it has certain restrictions on this power where the executive cannot formulate any ordinance. As established in the above paragraph the intent of the members of the drafting committee was not to narrow the ambit of the ordinance-making power, going with Brazil’s model wouldn’t be feasible as the ambit of such power with the executive in India is too wide.

Conclusion

The ordinance-making power has been severely criticised by many and people like Rajeev Dhawan describe this power as creating legislation by cheating democracy; continuing such practice of re-promulgation is even a bigger fraud as it is a continuation of a practice (ordinance-making) that does not go well with the elected and representative polity as envisaged in our constitution. Thus, the practice should have been stopped by the court in D.C Wadhwa’s case itself or the Supreme Court must have overruled the case in Krishna Kumar’s judgement.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What legal principle was primarily challenged in the Dr. D.C. Wadhwa case?

The primary legal challenge in Dr. D.C. Wadhwa’s case was against the practice of “ordinance raj” where the executive, represented by the Governor, repetitively issued the same ordinances without the approval of the legislature by circumventing the democratic process.

Can the executive still issue ordinances after this case?

Yes, the executive (President or Governor) still retains the power to issue ordinances under certain circumstances when immediate action is necessary and the legislature is not in session. However, this power must be used sparingly and cannot be a substitute for the regular legislative process, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in this case.

What does the term ‘locus standi’ mean in the context of this case?

In the context of the Dr. D.C. Wadhwa case, ‘locus standi’ refers to the right of an individual to bring action in court. The case reinforces the concept that individuals can challenge the constitutionality of ordinances not only when they are personally affected but also when they are acting in the public interest to uphold constitutional values and governance principles.

Reference


Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Download Now

Arbitration procedure under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 

0
arbitration

This article is written by Mohd Sarim Khan and further updated by Prashant Prasad. This article will discuss the process of the arbitral proceedings and various provisions related to the arbitral process in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. Furthermore, the present article discusses the comparative analysis of arbitration with other forms of dispute resolution mechanisms. 

Table of Contents

Introduction

 “Justice Delayed is Justice Denied”

“Justice Hurried is Justice Buried”

We are not unaware that the current judicial system has been unable to furnish timely and cost effective relief to a party. There are more than 5 crore cases pending before the court of law. It can be reckoned that, if we stop filing fresh suits today, it’s going to take more than seven years to clear the pendency of cases. The present legal system is such that it is much more expensive and time consuming. Sometimes the cost of legal proceedings exceeds the value of the claim. The delay in the legal proceedings is one of the most disadvantageous parts of the entire litigation process. It has been generally observed that for the completion of a civil suit, it takes around 15-20 years. As a result of delay physical, mental, financial and many other kinds of harassment are faced by the parties to the dispute. With the evolution of technology, different kinds of cases appear in the court every day in which the judges might lack the expertise. It has resulted in ambiguous and irrelevant decisions and consequential appeals to the higher forum. Arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism emerges as the most compatible option for the parties and such disputes.

The arbitration process can be faster as well as more flexible than that of litigation as there are fewer complex procedures involved in the arbitration process providing parties with the opportunity to resolve their dispute in less time. Apart from this the award that is made after the arbitral proceeding has an obligatory effect among the parties to the arbitral proceeding and is effectuated in a way as if it were the final judicial decree. Thus, it provides parties with an alternative way apart from the court proceeding in which they can resolve their dispute which has the same effect, but in an easy and flexible manner.  

In the year 1990, there was economic liberalisation in India. As a result, there was a boost in foreign investment, and many foreign companies started to invest in India. Moreover, Indian companies started to offer services and products to foreign customers. Due to all these investments, there was the need to create a dispute resolution mechanism that could cater to commercial disputes arising out of the foreign relations. There were a few subsisting laws to govern the disputes arising out of commercial relations such as the Indian Arbitration Act, 1899, the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, The Arbitration Act, 1940 etc., but all these laws had some lacunae in them and hence the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter called “The Act”) was passed to fill those gaps in the previous laws.

The Act is primarily based on the model of UNCITRAL and the main objective of this Act is to integrate and bring about changes in the laws relating to domestic arbitration, international commercial arbitration and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. 

What is arbitration

Arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism is a method that has emerged to prevent court litigation and resolve disputes between the parties in a timely, efficient and amicable manner. However, an amicable settlement between the parties does not mean compromising in any circumstances. The arbitration is mainly presided over by the arbitrator and the decision is given by him. The arbitrator is selected as the neutral third person who may be an expert in the field of arbitral issues. The parties are bound by the time limit and rules that are fixed by the arbitrator within which the dispute must be settled. 

Stages of the arbitral procedure

Arbitration clause or arbitration agreement

During the drafting of any contract pertaining to either insurance, partnership, any civil matter, or any other matter. The parties shall add an arbitration clause in the contract, the clause should state that in the future, if any disputes arise among the parties then, in that case, they can resolve it through the arbitration process. During the drafting of an arbitration clause in the contract, the person who is drafting needs to be very careful to make the clause in a detailed manner and ensure every possibility in which the disputes can be raised out of contract or due to the relation of the contract. In the event that the parties do not have an arbitration clause in the contract, the parties at that point can make an arbitration agreement, but it should be with their mutual consent, in order to solve the disputes arising out of the previous contract.

The case of South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs. Sms AamwTollways Pvt. Ltd. (2018) was decided by the Supreme Court of India. The present case was under Clause 16 of the agreement itself, and it was held by the court that arbitration is to be understood as the process by which the dispute is resolved by such an arbitrator which is chosen and acceptable to both sides under the arbitration agreement. 

Notice of arbitration

Section 21 of the Act states about when arbitration can commence. The dispute among the party begins on that particular date on which a request for the dispute as referred to arbitration is received by the respondent. From the date the respondent has received the legal notice to the date of completion of the fixed period given in the notice, the parties must give a reply to the notice.

Appointment of arbitrators

Section 10(1) of the Act states that the parties are free to agree on any number of arbitrators, however, the number of arbitrators should not be in the even number. Further, Section 10(2) enunciates that in case parties fail to decide arbitrators in accordance with Section 10(1), then under that circumstance the arbitral tribunal shall consist of a sole arbitrator. 

The Supreme Court of India in the case of IBI Consultancy India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DSC Limited (2018), held that it is the cardinal principle of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act that the parties are free to agree on the number of arbitrators. However, it must be an odd number. If the circumstances are as such in which the parties are unable to agree on the procedure prescribed, or are not able to form the arbitral tribunal with their mutual satisfaction. Then, either of the parties can take the remedy that is provided under Section 11, which provides the detailed procedure and additional machinery through which the arbitrator can be appointed with the intervention of the judiciary.

Parties mutually decide on the matter of the appointment of arbitrators. The parties to the arbitration agreement or clause must mention the name of the concerned arbitrator who will resolve the dispute. In case the parties fail to decide mutually on the appointment of the arbitrator then under those circumstances, Section 11 of the Act, states that the parties must move to the court and request for the appointment of an arbitrator.

Statement of claim

Section 23 of the Act, states that within the time period that is fixed by the parties, the claimant must state supporting facts about his claim, the point of issue and relief.

The parties need to submit their statement of claim which should be accompanied by all the documents that must be supported by the relevant facts and the issues of the arbitration. It is pertinent to note that the claim can be changed if the parties agree to it, then they can alter or change the claim during the arbitral proceeding or unless the arbitral tribunal considers the claim to be inappropriate. 

Hearing of parties

Steps that are involved during the process of hearing of the parties:

Preliminary hearing and exchange of information stage

After the arbitrator is appointed and is confirmed, the preliminary hearing of the arbitration proceeding begins in which the parties call their arbitrator so that the schedule can be fixed. During the preliminary meeting, primarily the issues of the dispute are addressed, and then the exchange of information is done among the parties and the next hearing date is scheduled. On the next date which was scheduled, the arbitrator will issue a written document commonly known as a ‘scheduling order.’ 

Stage of hearing 

At this stage, the case is presented to the arbitrators by the parties. This process can either take place in person, or can be over the telephone, or by submitting the written documents or arbitration agreements and applicable rules that govern the case. Parties need to submit written arguments after hearings, as directed by the arbitrator.

Award stage

After the hearing is completed, and the arbitrator determines that no more evidence will be presented, then in that condition the hearing is closed and a date is fixed when the award will be issued. 

Arbitral award

An arbitral award is considered as a final order which is given by the arbitrator. The award can either be in terms of monetary relief by one party or by other parties. Also an award can be a non-financial one such as adding the incentives of employment or stopping the business practices. 

Essentials of the award

Essentials of the award given in an arbitral proceeding –

  • The award must be in written form and duly signed either by the majority or by all.
  • The date and place of the award should be mentioned.
  • The reason for the decision must be mentioned in the award, except when parties have agreed that there is no need to give that reason or when there is a mutual settlement during the proceeding which is recorded as an award. 
  • The arbitral award should be certain and the final award must not be vague, uncertain and ambiguous. 
  • There is no such need for the registration of an award, award is like a final judicial decree and must be enforced in the same way. 

Types of arbitral awards

Interim award

This is a temporary award given by the tribunal during which the proceeding is going on. An Interim award can be made by such a tribunal which has the authority to grant a final award. Interim orders are generally given for the money payment or for property’s disposition between the parties and an order to make an interim payment is on account of the costs of the arbitration.

Interim Measures by the arbitral tribunal

During the arbitral proceeding if the parties apply to the arbitral tribunal for granting the interim relief then under that condition interim relief may be granted by the tribunal. However, the party applying for seeking the interim relief must do it during the arbitral proceeding, or any time after the arbitral award is made but before the enforcement of the arbitral award. Section 17 of the Act gives the arbitral tribunal the power to grant interim measures and it may include –

  • Directions for the appointment of a guardian for any minor person or the person of unsound mind for the purpose of arbitral proceedings.
  • The order for interim relief can be for the prevention, custody or sale of any goods that form the subject matter of the arbitration agreement.
  • Directions can be made for securing the amount of the claim.
  • Through interim measures, the tribunal can allow interim injunctions.
  • The tribunal can give the direction regarding detention, prevention, or inspection of any property or anything that is the subject matter of the dispute in arbitration. The direction can also be given for entering any land or any building which is in the possession of another party, and the order regarding taking samples, making observations, or trying any experiment can be given by the tribunal to obtain the full information.
  • Direction can be made for the appointment of a receiver.
  • Such other interim measures can be granted for the protection that appears just and convenient to the arbitral tribunal.

However, it is pertinent to note that the arbitral tribunal cannot pass such an order that might affect the rights of a third party. The courts have also been given the power to grant interim measures and the provision regarding the same is being presented under Section 9 of the Act. 

Final award

The final award is the order given by the arbitrator after the completion of the entire arbitration proceeding. The arbitrator must state the reason for the decisions made in the award. After the final award is made it must be signed by all the arbitrators and the parties. 

Challenge in court 

For challenging the award the party in whose favour the award is given by the arbitrator needs to wait for a period of 90 days and during this period, other parties have the right to challenge awards i.e. aggrieved party. 

In accordance with Section 34 of the Act, it states that the court can set aside the arbitral award if:

  • The party was under some type of incapacity.
  • The contract of arbitration wasn’t valid under the law to which the parties had been subjected.  
  • The party making an application for invoking the arbitration has not given proper opportunity to the other party for the appointment of the arbitrator.
  • The award deals with disputes that do not fall under the submission of the arbitration or contain any other matter which is beyond the scope of arbitration.

Other vital elements of arbitral procedure

Seat and venue 

In arbitration, a seat is the legal construct and it depends on the jurisdiction where the final arbitral award will be made. However, the seat has a great impact on the entire legal procedure of the arbitration. Every jurisdiction applies its own set of rules and regulations for the process of arbitration and that is why it is necessary for the parties to decide the seat of the arbitration with proper diligence. The selection of the seat for the arbitral proceedings not only determines the law governing the arbitral proceedings but also the rights pertaining to the enforcement of the arbitral awards.

The venue of arbitration is the place where parties meet, in the case the arbitration is an institutional arbitration, it is generally conducted at that place where the institution is located or at any other place that the institution deems fit. If the arbitration is ad hoc arbitration, the place of arbitration is decided by the parties and hence changes accordingly. The venue does not determine the seat of arbitration, it merely determines the geographical location where arbitration proceedings will be conducted, which is chosen on the basis of convenience. 

Cost

The cost of the entire arbitration proceeding must be borne by both parties to the arbitration. It is well settled and completely against the law that only one party bears the cost of proceeding solely, thus, the plaintiff, as well as the respondent, will have to pay the entire fees, or as decided by both parties mutually. 

Limitation to commencement of arbitration

Section 43(2) of the act, states that on the date on which the cause of arbitration occurred, the period of limitation begins to run for the claimant to invoke the arbitration clause. The needless communication or reminders cannot postpone this accrual of the cause of action nor stop the limitation period from beginning, even if there is no mention of the limitation period in the arbitration clause.

How long do arbitral proceedings last

The Limitation Act, 1963 applies to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 unless expressly excluded by the Act. The arbitration proceedings will be time-barred if they commence after the period of three years from the particular date on which the cause of action arose. 

The parties do have the right to fix their own set of rules for the arbitral proceeding. If the parties do not agree on any procedure, the tribunal in that situation has the authority to conduct the proceeding in such a manner as it considers appropriate. However, the tribunal will not apply any provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 and the Evidence Act, 1872. In the arbitration contract, if the arbitration proceeding is to be administered by an arbitration institution then in that condition setting rules of that institution becomes a part of the arbitration clause by implication. In cases where the arbitral proceeding is governed by an ad hoc arbitration, such parties do have the liberty to make their own set of rules for the procedure.

Amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act require holding oral hearings of the evidence or oral argument on a day-to-day basis and granting no adjournments unless sufficient cause is provided. The tribunal may impose exemplary costs on the party seeking frivolous adjournments or dates.

Different opinions of the arbitrator are allowed under the Act. The opinion of the arbitrators shall prepare a separate sheet of award or to give their opinion in the same document which contains the award of the majority members of the tribunal. But, this variance opinion or award does not form part of the majority decision and is not enforceable.

Local courts can intervene in the proceedings of domestic arbitration which includes the power to issue interim orders, order for the presentation of evidence directly to the tribunal and appoint arbitrators.

Enforcement of arbitral award

Once the final award is given by the arbitral tribunal, other parties have the right to challenge the arbitral award in the court by an application for setting aside such an arbitral award.

The court can set aside the arbitral award if:

  • The parties to the dispute are under some incapability.
  • If an arbitration agreement is invalid under that law in which the parties have made the contract. 
  • The party to an arbitration agreement was not given proper notice for the appointment of the arbitrator.
  • If the arbitral award is beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration.

Domestic award enforcement

On the enforcement and execution of the award given by the tribunal, an award holder shall have to wait for a period of 90 days and during this intervening period, the party has the right to challenge the award in the court. The challenge of the award shall be in accordance with Section 34 which provides for the procedure for applying for setting aside an arbitral award.

Foreign award enforcement

The foreign arbitration award enforcement must be given in a New York Convention that was adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference on 10 June, 1958 to resolve those disputes which are arising out of a legal relationship. The Geneva Convention as well as the New York Convention provides that any foreign arbitral agreement needs to be in writing and there is no need for it to be in a particular format. The foreign award must be legally valid and should arise from an enforceable arbitration contract. To give effect to an award, an arbitration award must be clear, unambiguous, unbiased and must have the capability to resolve the dispute.

Case laws surrounding arbitration procedure

Cox and Kings Ltd v. SAP India Pvt Ltd. & Anr. (2023)

Facts 

The brief factuality of the present case is as follows, the petitioner in this case was Cox and Kings Limited engaged into the SAP software end user licence agreement and SAP enterprises support schedule on the date of 14.12.2010. As a result, petitioners were made to licence ERP software, which was owned and developed by the SAP Private Limited i.e. respondent no. 1. This is the basic agreement that all the customers of the respondent have entered into, before utilising any software which is developed by the respondent.

In the year 2015 when the petitioner was working on the development of an e-commerce platform that was owned by him, at that time the respondents recommended to the petitioner their “Hybrid Solution” which will be 90% compatible along with the present application of the petitioner. The respondents further said that the remaining 10% would merely take the span of 10 months to be completed which would be in the best interest of the petitioner. For the proper execution of the “Hybrid Solution” the agreement was divided into three transactions namely –

  • The first agreement was the software licence and support agreement, signed between the petitioner and the respondent on 30.10.2015 for purchasing SAP Hybrid Software.
  • The second agreement was the service’s general terms and conditional agreement on 30.10.2015, this agreement had an arbitration clause.
  • The third agreement which was entered on 16.11.2015 was the agreement of customization i.e. customization agreement for the customization of software.

Till the 16th of August, the petitioner was facing several issues regarding the implementation of the hybrid solution; as a result, the contract regarding the SAP hybrid solution was rescinded on the date of 15.11.2015. Respondent after the contract was rescinded has withdrawn all the necessary resources from the petitioner. The petitioner, aggrieved by the act of the respondent, demanded a refund of rupees 45 crore which was earlier paid regarding the Implementation service, licence agreement, and annual maintenance charge.

After several discussions and meetings, the dispute couldn’t be solved between the parties by mutual communication. Due to this, notice was issued by respondent no. 1 invoking the arbitration clause with regards to the service’s general terms and conditional agreement and demanding the payment of rupees 17 crore on the ground that the contract was wrongfully terminated by the petitioner. Pursuant to this an arbitral tribunal was constituted and further the arbitration proceeding was initiated and respondent no. 2 was made part of the proceeding. Meanwhile, an application under Section 16 of the Act, was filed by the petitioner and contended that all four agreements that the parties have entered upon form a composite transaction, and must be the part of a single proceeding.

On the date 22.10.2019, the National Company Law Tribunal accepted the application that was made under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which was against the petitioner and has made the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional. Further, on the date of 05.11.2019, the NCLT said that the arbitration proceeding should be adjourned by the parties and hence the corporate insolvency resolution process was initiated. 

Further, 2nd notice regarding the invocation of arbitration proceedings was sent by the petitioner to respondent no. 2 but in turn, no response was received. Aggrieved by this an application was filed by the petitioner before the Honourable Supreme Court of India under Section 11(6) and 11(12) (a) of the Act for the initiation of arbitral proceedings and the constitution of the tribunal. 

Issues 

  • The main issue pertaining to this case was whether the “Group Companies Doctrine” is applicable in this arbitration proceeding to array respondent no.2 as the party to the proceeding. 
  • Whether the “Group Companies Doctrine” coexists with the alter ego principles or piercing the corporate veil principle. 

Group of Companies Doctrine 

This doctrine allows for the extension of the arbitral agreement on such entities within the corporate group, even if they’re not signatories to the agreement. 

Judgment

The Judgment was delivered by the Supreme Court’s Constitutional bench in which it was held by the court that the “Group Companies Doctrine” can’t have a blanket application and further different parameters regarding the case were specified. The court of law held that for determining whether a non-signatory party is compelled by the arbitration agreement or not, then in that scenario the intention and the conduct of the parties must be taken into consideration.

The judgement lays down that arbitral agreement extension to the non-signatories must be dealt with the due diligence. Further, it was held by the court of law that the alter ego principle or piercing the corporate veil principle cannot be made the basis for the application of the “Group Companies Doctrine”. It can be inferred by the judgement that the Act and the conduct of the non-signatory party serve as an important factor in determining whether they can be bound by the arbitration agreement or not. Further, it was clarified that the decision on the issue of “Group Companies Doctrine” should be determined by the arbitral tribunal and not by the court. 

Associate Builders v. Delhi Development Authority (2014)

Facts 

In the present case, the appellant was awarded with the construction work by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA, defendant), and the construction work was given on the contract to the appellant. The appellant has to build 168 Middle Income Group and 56 Lower Income Group House as per, the contract which specified the tender amount of Rs. 87,66,678/- was given to the appellant to complete the construction work. As per the contract, the construction work has to be completed within 9 months but was completed in 34 months. The contractor i.e. appellant has completed the work of only 166 Middle Income Group and 36 Lower Income Group House. The total value of work which was done by the contractor was Rs. 62,84,845/-.

It was contended by the appellant that the delay in completion of the construction was because of the defendant’s fault; around 15 claims were made by the appellant regarding the default made by the defendant. As a result, the Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator to initiate an arbitral proceeding on this matter. After going through all the 15 claims, the arbitrator concluded that there are 4 claims that are most relevant. Considering these 4 claims, it was stated that the delay was indeed because of the defendant’s fault. It was further stated by the arbitrator that the respondent failed to fulfil the obligation as a result delay was caused and further the appellant has suffered a huge monetary loss.

The defendant objecting to the arbitral award appealed to the Delhi High Court, however, the learned single judge bench dismissed the appeal and sustained the award which was given by the arbitral tribunal. Thereafter, the defendant appealed the matter to the divisional bench of that particular court itself under Section 37 of the said Act against a single judge bench order. The divisional bench overruled the previous decision given by the single judge bench and also the awards of the arbitral tribunal were set aside. 

The appellant then appealed to the Apex Court by the Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution against the order of the divisional bench. 

Issues 

The primary issue of this case was whether the divisional bench had surpassed its jurisdiction in setting aside the award given by the arbitral tribunal.

Judgment

The court of law in this case allowed the appeal and further set aside the impugned award. It was held by the Supreme Court that under Section 34 the court must not set aside the award given by the arbitral tribunal if they don’t agree with the interpretation of the agreement which is given by the arbitral tribunal. In order to set aside the award the court must show that the decision given by the tribunal was based on the irregular or no evidence.

Konkan Railway Corporation Limited v. Chenab Bridge Project Undertaking (2023)

Facts

In the present case, the respondent was given the contract for the construction of a bridge on the Udhampur-Srinagar-Baramulla rail link in 2004. Subsequently, the dispute arose regarding the execution of the contract as a result the Standing Arbitral Tribunal was formed in the year 2012. The arbitral tribunal considered various claims (regarding- Dispute I, Dispute II, and Dispute III), and after considering all the claims of the dispute rejected the entire claim which was made and, finally, the award was given in the year 2014. The respondent aggrieved by the decision of the tribunal challenged the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, and the Single Judge of the High Court confirmed the award. Further, the respondent appealed the award under Section 37 of the Act to the Divisional Bench of the same High Court. The Divisional Bench of the High Court partly allowed the appeal, specifically addressing Dispute III and Dispute IV. 

Dispute III deals with the claim of the reimbursement of the Entry Tax after there was the withdrawal exemption notification by the government. Dispute IV deals with the reimbursement of the Toll Tax on the machinery and materials due to an increase in taxes during the period of the contract. The judgement delivered by the Divisional Bench of the High Court led to the subsequent appeal to the Supreme Court of India. 

Issues

The main issue before the court was regarding the scope of Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in examining any order, setting aside or refusing to set aside an award. 

Judgement

The court in its judgement clarified that the jurisdiction of court under Section 37 is similar to that under Section 34 of the Act. The court stated that the scope of appeal under Section 37 is limited and is subjected to the same grounds as mentioned under Section 34. 

It was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that the court should not casually intervene with the arbitral award. The court was of the view that the mere possibility of an alternative view on fact and different views that can be taken on the particular matter, does not justify reversing the decision that is given by the arbitral tribunal. 

The court finally concluded that in the present case, both the Arbitral Tribunal and the Single Judge Bench exercised their reasonable power to arrive at the judgement and it should not be considered as illogical or irrational. Therefore, the Divisional Bench must not have interfered with their order. As a result, the Supreme Court of India allowed the appeal and set aside the judgement that was given by the Divisional Bench of the High Court and restored the judgement and order that was given by the Single Judge. 

Comparative analysis with other ADR mechanisms

The Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanism helps the parties to resolve their dispute amicably without going to court. There are various forms of ADR mechanisms such as Arbitration (as discussed above), Mediation, Conciliation, Negotiation etc. These methods give parties to the dispute an opportunity to settle it with much ease without tumbling into any litigation process. The main objective of all these mechanisms is to provide the parties with speedy justice who are in dispute, although there are certain points of differentiation between these mechanisms and a comparison could be drawn on the basis of it. 

Arbitration vs. mediation

Differences between Arbitration and Mediation

BasisArbitrationMeditation
DecisionIn the case of arbitration once an arbitral tribunal makes the award, then the award does have a binding effect. Even if the award which is given by the tribunal is unsatisfactory by the parties, it still would have a binding effect. However, the award which is given by the arbitral tribunal can be challenged on some specific grounds.In mediation, the decision or the settlement is binding only when it is agreed and mutually settled between both the parties. If both the parties do not mutually agree with the decision then it would have the non-binding effect.
Interaction among the partiesIn the case of arbitration parties barely communicate, it is the arbitrator who listens to the submission which is made by both the parties, and on the basis of submission the arbitral tribunal gives an award.In the mediation process, the parties can interact and communicate with each other because in mediation the parties play a pivotal role in reaching a settlement of the dispute and the mediator only acts as a bridge between the communications of both parties. However, for the communication the mediator needs to be present there and must assist the parties with the communication.
Third-party involvementIn the case of arbitration, the third party involved is known as the arbitrator/s. However, the person to be qualified as an arbitrator must have reasonable qualifications as prescribed under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.In a mediation proceeding the third party that is involved is known as the mediator. The mediator can be appointed directly by the parties or by the court in cases of pending litigation.
Nature of proceedingIn arbitration proceedings, the arbitral tribunal is bound by the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Therefore the adherence of the provision of this statute is important in order to give effect to a valid arbitral proceeding.In mediation, the main procedure that the parties along with the mediator follow is the communication techniques that aim to reach an amicable settlement. Therefore, the process of mediation is not governed by specific rules and statutes, as a result the entire mediation proceeding is very flexible and not rigid.

Analysis – Mediation v. Arbitration, which is better

If a person needs to choose between arbitration and mediation, then it depends upon the specific subject matter of dispute and circumstances of the case further, the relation between the parties is also a deciding factor. If the parties are as such where they can work together diligently to reach the probable solution with the help of specialised communication techniques then in that particular situation mediation would be the best choice for the parties. But, if the case is as such wherein the parties cannot work together diligently to reach the probable solution, then in that scenario parties can approach arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism.

Additionally, if the parties want such a mechanism in which they could resolve their dispute at a minimum cost then under these circumstances the parties could preferably choose mediation. The mediation gives parties an opportunity to solve the matter in a flexible and efficient manner. However, the process of mediation cannot be used in a scenario where there is complexity in the case and in the complex situation parties should opt for arbitration.  

Arbitration vs. conciliation

Differences between Arbitration and Conciliation

BasisArbitrationConciliation
Third-party involvementIn arbitration the third party who administers the conflict is the arbitrator, the arbitrator is appointed under Section 11 of the Act. The duty of the arbitrator is to give equal and full opportunity to both parties, the arbitrator is impartial towards the decision making and based on the facts and circumstances of the case he gives the probable solution to the parties in the form of an arbitral award which is binding on the parties.The neutral third party that is involved in the conciliation proceeding is known as the conciliator. The conciliator is appointed under Section 64 of the Act. The main duty of the conciliator is to oversee the conciliation proceedings and act as a bridge between both parties to give them an effective settlement.
Prior agreementFor arbitration proceedings, both parties should agree beforehand during the time of making the “arbitration agreement”. The arbitration agreement must contain a clause stating that during any dispute or conflict the disputed matter should be referred to the arbitration. Therefore, for arbitration to happen the prior agreement must be there between the parties. In some instances parties can decide to refer matters to arbitration in real time after the dispute if consent is there of both parties.In case of conciliation the parties need not to agree about it beforehand. The parties can opt directly for the conciliation based on the situation and the nature of the conflict.
Procedure followedArbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism is a bit of a formal process, it appears as if some procedure of court is being followed while conducting arbitral proceedings. For instance the arbitrator can call witnesses or take evidence to facilitate the arbitral proceeding.Conciliation is an informal process when no complex procedure is followed between the parties and the conciliator; they can even sit on the round table to settle their dispute in an effective manner.
Mutual discussionIn the case of arbitration the arbitrators are not allowed to talk directly with the parties about the issues of their case, and about their perspective as to what can be the solution of this problem. However, the arbitrator can give parties the opportunity to keep their opinion. But, the mutual interaction between the parties and the arbitrators are least.The main objective of conciliation is to reach a settlement among the parties through effective communication techniques. Therefore, the conciliator is allowed to mutually discuss among the parties their problem and the probable solution that they are thinking can be agreed upon by both parties.
Award and EnforceabilityDuring or at the end of the arbitral proceeding if any award comes, then it is known as the arbitral award and it is enforceable against the disputing parties. For the arbitral proceeding, the award can also include an interim award i.e. the award made during the proceeding.The settlement made by the conciliator is not legally binding unless the parties voluntarily decide to formalise it into the contract.
DurationAlthough the entire process of arbitration is quicker than the litigation there are certain prescribed times for the completion of the arbitral proceeding which might even take months and years for its completion. In case of a domestic arbitration the entire arbitration proceeding needs to be done within 12 months from the date on which the pleading was completed. In case of the international commercial arbitration it needs to be completed as early as possible but it must be tried to be completed within 12 months.Conciliation can be quicker than that of arbitration as it involves the communication between the parties to resolve the matter efficiently.

Can a Conciliator Act as an Arbitrator in the matter which was conciliated by him before 

According to the UNCITRAL Model Law, it is specified that a conciliator must not act as an arbitrator in the dispute which was previously conciliated by that conciliator. Based on this provision of the UNCITRAL Model, Section 80 of the Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996, provides that unless otherwise agreed by the parties –

  • The conciliator must not act as a representative, arbitrator, or council of any party in any judicial or arbitral proceeding in respect of any dispute that is subject to conciliation proceedings.
  • The conciliator must not be presented by the parties in any proceeding be it a judicial or arbitral as a witness. 

However, if the parties to the dispute agree in writing that their conciliator can be appointed as an arbitrator then in that case the conciliator can be appointed as an arbitrator. For, conducting the further arbitral proceeding by the conciliator, once appointed by the parties, then in that case the conciliator then will be bound to follow such provision of substantive and procedural law which is necessary for facilitating the proper arbitral proceeding.

In the case of Welspun Corp. Ltd v. Micro and Small, Medium Enterprises Facilitation Council, Punjab and Ors (2011), it was held that the council which the state has appointed, on the termination of the conciliation proceeding, shall have the power to act as an arbitrator if the parties have agreed to it with an agreement.  

Therefore, generally, the conciliator cannot act as an arbitrator for the subsequent arbitration proceeding, but if there is an agreement between the parties as to the appointment and the arbitration clause does not provide any bar, then in that scenario the conciliator can be appointed as an arbitrator.

Analysis

Arbitration and Conciliation are two excellent mechanisms that are working towards the resolution of disputes in an effective and efficient way. But, it depends on the nature of the dispute, and analysing the nature of the dispute would help us to understand whether arbitration or conciliation should be used in that dispute.

Conciliation is used majorly in situations where the parties that are in dispute are willing to work effectively toward a settlement with the help of mutual communication. If the situation is as such where the official decision is mandatory to resolve the conflict between the parties such as breach of contract, then in that case arbitration can be used. 

Arbitration vs. negotiation

Differences between Arbitration and Negotiation

BasisArbitrationNegotiation
Third-party involvementIn the process of arbitration, a third party is involved who is the decision maker and is known as an arbitrator. The arbitrator after hearing both the parties delivers an award known as an arbitral award.In negotiation, there is no third party involved. In negotiation the parties have full control over the decision making, negotiation is the communication process aimed at reaching a mutually accepted solution without any third party’s intervention.
Binding nature of the outcomeThe decision that comes in the arbitration is known as an arbitral award and this award does have a binding effect on the parties.The negotiation process renders the binding effect if the parties voluntarily agree to make it binding by way of agreement on the decision that the parties have finally reached.
ConfidentialityThe process of arbitration is often confidential, the arbitration proceedings are generally performed in private and the decision made by the arbitral tribunal is not disclosed to the public.In the negotiation process, confidentiality depends upon the parties. If they wish to keep their discussion private and confidential then they can sign an agreement regarding the same. However, discussion can be kept private if the parties desire to do so.
FormalityThe process of arbitration is generally more formal, in which there is adherence to the procedures and the substantive laws. The procedure is somehow similar to that of court proceedings and hence the entire arbitration process can be considered as a formal process.Negotiation is less formal, providing flexibility to the parties to solve their case without any formality, with regards to the procedures, documentation, time, and location.
Time and Cost incurredArbitration is a time consuming process as the entire process is formal and for the completion of arbitration proceedings, it might take months and years for its completion. Furthermore, arbitration is expensive, due to the formalities that are associated with the arbitration proceeding from the hiring of the arbitrator, documentation, legal representations, etc.The negotiation process is quick and less costly. Since negotiation merely involves the communication between the parties without any third person’s intervention for whom a fee might be required as in the case of the arbitration.

Is arbitration better than litigation

One of the most common questions that arise in our mind is whether arbitration is better than that of litigation, and the answer to this depends upon the different circumstances. However, it cannot be denied that arbitration offers several advantages making it a favourable option in specific circumstances. When we look and compare arbitration with that of litigation it can be noticed that arbitration is less expensive (which can vary, depending upon the complexity of the dispute and the amount of time and resources) as the procedure for arbitration is less complex and winds up the entire dispute in a favourable time period. Another aspect where the arbitration could be beneficial for the parties, is during consideration of the time period, in litigation, the dispute can take years and years to get resolved (e.g. – civil suits), but in case of arbitration, the matter is disposed of as expeditiously as possible. Moreover, in the arbitral proceeding confidentiality is mentioned, unlike the court proceeding which is a matter of public record in most cases.

Although arbitration has merits over litigation, under some circumstances litigation may be preferred, for instance, if the matter involves a complex legal issue or a large amount of money is under question, then in that scenario litigation could be the best suited option. Moreover, if the opposing parties are uncooperative and unwilling to work and engage in the arbitral proceedings then under that condition also litigation can be chosen over arbitration. Therefore, there are many factors such as cost, speed, privacy, nature of dispute etc. which should be taken into consideration when choosing between arbitration and litigation. 

Conclusion

From the above discussion, it can be concluded that the first and foremost important step in the arbitral process is the arbitration clause which must be framed very diligently while making the arbitration clause or arbitration agreement. Arbitration supports the party’s autonomy. During the framing of the arbitration clauses, parties have to decide the appointment of the arbitrator, the number of arbitrators, rules applicable in the arbitration. After the final arbitration award, it is enforced by the law applicable in such jurisdiction of the arbitration.

Alternative dispute resolution like arbitration is paving the way so that the dispute can be resolved in an effective manner in which both parties could benefit in the least time as opposed to the conventional way of dispute resolution mechanism such as litigation. Considering the burden on the judiciary, all forms of alternative dispute resolution are playing a crucial role in providing justice to the parties in such a way, so that the existing burden on the judiciary could be reduced. With the efficient working of all the forms of dispute resolution, the time would be near in which the disputing parties would opt to resolve their dispute amicably in a time efficient manner without tumbling into the court proceeding. At the end of the day, the goal of every dispute resolution mechanism is to provide a solution to the disputing parties and this purpose may be achieved through litigation, arbitration, mediation, negotiation, or any other form of alternative dispute resolution. 

Frequently Asked Questions(FAQs)

What is international commercial arbitration?

Section 2(1)(f) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 defines international commercial arbitration as the dispute that arises out of a legal relationship where one party is a foreign citizen or residing in any foreign country. The party can also be a foreign legal person or any company that is controlled outside India, or else one party to the dispute is a foreign government, in this case, the arbitration proceeding that will be conducted is known as an international commercial arbitration.

What are the different kinds of awards under this Act?

The arbitral award that is given under this Act can be of two types the first one is the “Final Award” which is given when the arbitral proceeding comes to an end and the second award is the “Interim Award” which is given during the arbitral proceeding. Furthermore, the award can either be a domestic award or a foreign award. 

What could be the number of arbitrators?

According to Section 10 of the Act, the parties can agree on any number of arbitrators, provided the number of arbitrators cannot be in even number.

When is the court’s assistance taken during the taking of evidence in an arbitration proceeding?

For facilitating the efficient conduct of the arbitral proceeding or if the arbitral tribunal desires so, or if the party wishes. An application can be made under Section 27(1) of the Act for seeking assistance, the application can either be made by the party with the tribunal’s approval or directly by the arbitral tribunal. Under Section 27(3) the court may make rules regarding taking of evidence.

When does the arbitral proceeding terminate?

As a general rule, arbitral proceedings terminate when the final award is given by the arbitral tribunal. However, there are some situations in which the tribunal can make the order for the termination these are –

  • If the claimant who has made the claim withdraws the claim and in turn respondent has no objection, then in that case arbitral proceedings can be terminated.
  • If both parties mutually agree on the termination of the proceeding. 
  • If the arbitral tribunal is of the opinion that the continuation of the proceeding may for any reason have become unnecessary or impossible. 

What is emergency arbitration? 

Speedy resolution of disputes is one of the vital and most essential features of arbitration, and because of this, the parties choose arbitration as a mechanism for dispute resolution. However, in many cases, it is not possible to complete the entire proceeding in a speedy manner such as in the case of a complex commercial dispute which might take a significant amount of time for its completion.

Therefore, under these circumstances urgent interim relief might be necessary by any of the parties, to prevent the subject matter of the dispute. Therefore, to address this issue the concept of emergency arbitration is designed. In emergency arbitration, the arbitral institution has been provided with the power to appoint an emergency arbitrator so that the emergency dispute can be resolved by granting the urgent interim relief until the constitution of the arbitral tribunal. The main aim of the emergency arbitration is to provide conservatory measures to the parties who cannot wait till the formation of the Arbitral Tribunal.

What is Med-arb?

There might be a situation where both the mediation and the arbitration are needed to reach at the outcome, therefore the process in which both the mediation and the arbitration are used to reach at the result is known as med-arb. In this process the conflicting parties first try to settle the conflict on their own with the mediator’s help. If the parties cannot come to the resolution of the dispute then in that situation the mediator transitions into the role of arbitrator and decides the outcome of the arbitration proceeding.

Note – The role of the arbitrator can only be taken by the mediator in med-arb if he’s qualified to be an arbitrator. Once the arbitral proceeding begins, the outcome will be binding among the parties.

Reference


Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Download Now

Incorporating environment sustainability in everyday lifestyle:   The need of the 21st century

0

This article has been written by Atchatha Murali pursuing a Training program on Using AI for Business Growth from Skill Arbitrage.

This article has been edited and published by Shashwat Kaushik.

Introduction

What if you wake up from your bed one day and realise that instead of an ocean view apartment, you are actually in the ocean? What if one day you find out there is no gas for your car or no conventional means to generate electricity to power your house? These are not hypothetical situations. They may well be a reality within 30-40 years. Since the first invention of spinning Jenny to automate the textile industry in 1764, every single invention or discovery during the industrial revolution for the past 200 years has tremendously improved human quality of life, making the world a global village. Those facilities, which were considered luxuries affordable only by royalties, have become basic standards of living for even the common man. But everything comes with a cost and a responsibility. For instance, fossil fuels, which take millions of years to form, were discovered approximately 200 years ago. But with the current rate of consumption, it may become a very rare commodity in almost 50 years. Even if new pouches of fossil fuels are  found in the near future, we will definitely punch a hole in the ozone with the alarming level of greenhouse gases emitted. Environmental sustainability is the key to ensuring that this nightmare doesn’t become a reality. Environmental sustainability is the mindful use of resources in the present without compromising on future needs. In simple terms, “can we afford to use it now or would we end up having to dance the winter away?”

Sustainable development goals (SDGs)

In 2015, the UN came up with 17 goals to be achieved by 2030, which were an urgent call for action by all countries in global partnership.They recognise that ending poverty and other deprivations must go hand-in-hand with strategies that improve health and education, reduce inequality, and spur economic growth—all while tackling climate change and working to preserve our oceans and forests. Every single goal had all three aspects of sustainability on the agenda, namely environment, social and governance. These 17 SDGs have been the blueprint for all the further global agendas, like the one’s compiled at the G20 summit. Of these 17 goals, SDG 3 (healthy lives and wellbeing), SDG 6 (water and sanitation), SDG 7 (ensuring access to clean and affordable energy), SDG 11 (cities and human settlements), SDG 12 (sustainable production and consumption), SDG 13 (climate changes), SDG 14 (oceans, seas and marine resources), and SDG 15 (terrestrial ecosystems) are largely related to the environmental dimension.

A few government initiatives related to the SDGs :

  • The National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) is providing adequate water with a minimum water quality index of 80.34 percent to 56% of the rural population. Also, more than 90% of the urban population has direct drinking water connections to their localities.
  • Namami Gange is a mission aimed at the rejuvenation of the river Ganga, apart from ensuring the sustainable use of the river water.
  • The portal “National Portal for rooftop solar” as of date has 57777 beneficiaries for whom the solar panels have been provided at a subsidised rate.
  • The National Biogas and Manure Management Programme aims to connect the toilet to biogas plants, thereby providing clean cooking fuel and organic manure to households through family type biogas plants
  • Other schemes like Pradhan Mantri Sahaj Bijli Har Ghar Yojana Saubhagya (home electrification project), PAHAL (LPG subsidy), Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gram Jyoti Yojana (agricultural electrification project), and Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (biomass to alternate fuel transitions) have been implemented.

Role of the global citizen in environmental sustainability

The escalating environmental challenges, including climate change, pollution, deforestation, and loss of biodiversity, require a collective effort to be addressed. Adopting sustainable practices in our daily lives can contribute to mitigating these issues. It is not just something to merely consider but an urgent obligation that needs to be done right now. The following are a few ways we can contribute:

The 3 ‘R’s – the pillars of sustainability.

‘Reduce Reuse And Recycle’ is one of the simplest mantras we can incorporate in our everyday lives. In our craze for better possessions or fake status, we are consuming more than what we actually want. According to statistics provided by the website Statista, more than two billion metric tonnes of municipal solid waste (MSW) are generated worldwide every year. While e-waste is a fast-growing stream, food is still the most common form of waste, accounting for almost 50 percent of global MSW generation, yet 783 million people go hungry every day. Most of the waste generated can be sufficiently recycled to make it fit for reuse. 

What can we do: 

  • carry simple cutlery like spoons,  bottles and boxes to carry our leftovers, thereby reducing restaurant food and plastic waste. 
  • Either manually recycle what can be recycled or separate the waste according to the locally prescribed standards before trashing it into the bin to assist in the proper recycling of the waste.

Energy conservation

Most of our energy needs are still met by conventional means of power generation, like fossil fuels. Though efforts are being made to incentivize non- conventional greener means like solar and wind energy, there is scope for more improvements as the installation and maintenance of these would still depend on conventional energy sources. But still, efforts are being made.

As of 2022, our per capita energy consumption for 8.0 billion people was 57.6 kWh. Per capita energy consumption increases when the country gets more industrial. 

What can we do: 

  • The most basic habit of turning off appliances like fans and lights when not in use could translate to a large reduction in consumption when we see it on a global scale.
  • Try to transition into a greener energy source there by creating more demand and reducing production and installation costs, which is the biggest reason people are not opting for those means.

Water conservation

It is very apt to say that “the way of water is the way of life.” The river basins have been the cradle of many civilisations. Even a 6th grader can comprehend how essential water is for our survival and knows that though our planet is 70% water, only 0.3 is potable liquid water. Yet we drain our water source and plan our urban habitat on lakes and river encroachments. Over half of the water in lakes and freshwater reservoirs has already dried up. There are even speculations that water will be the new “oil” and will rule the global currency. 

What can we do:

  • Turn the taps off when not needed, even if it is for a few seconds, thereby reducing the consumption.
  • Use the water more than once. For instance, reuse the water waste from the water filters to flower the plants.
  • Recycle the water when possible. Even the water waste from the washing machine can be reused by treating it with potash alum stone and filtering the sediments. 
  • Consciously avoid lake and river encroachments.

Sustainable transportation

In 2022, 7.6% of the world GDP was from travel and tourism. Shipping and trade have dominated the world’s GDP with 50-60% share. Development in every single sector is directly or indirectly owing to fast transportation. But the fuel and energy needed for it are responsible for 75% of greenhouse gas emissions and 90% of CO2 consumption. 

What can we do:

  • We may walk or use rental bicycles when the distance is within a km or two.
  • Using public transportation or car pooling will additionally contribute to the local economy, apart from reducing the carbon footprint of the area.

Mindful consumption

The Industrial Revolution was all about moving the ball from the court of producers to consumers. Every single commodity was made available and affordable to everyone and because income and expenditure spiralled to new heights, the entire ecosystem of the world economy skyrocketed to new heights. The famous quote “just because we can doesn’t mean we should ” precisely conveys mindful consumption. The electronic waste generated is more than 20 kilogrammes per person per year. The used clothes in good condition are recirculated into the developing nation’s markets for a lower price, thereby crippling the local weavers and tradesmen. Also, to improve net profit, demand is artificially created by showcasing articles as symbols of the elitist class or as basic requirements for survival. 

What can we do: 

  • wait for 3 days before buying an item to check if we actually want it or are we giving into our momentary impulse?
  • Shun the social taboo of “one time use” and utilise everything till it cannot be used anymore and donate it when you have more.

Conclusion

So as to venture into a prosperous 22nd century, every individual needs to pitch in. Frugal living can be one of the easiest ways to reduce our ecological footprint. If we are wondering what impact it will have when industries are pumping pollutants into the environment, only our demand runs the supply. But in the name of going green, we can’t afford to tip the economic scale. So a balance has to be achieved. But what is the exact point between supporting the economy and being a responsible green consumer? This is a question we need to decide for ourselves.

References

Download Now

Modern law of contract : an analysis

0

This article has been written by Sakshi Keshri pursuing a Diploma in International Contract Negotiation, Drafting and Enforcement from LawSikho.

This article has been edited and published by Shashwat Kaushik

Introduction

The law of contracts governs contracts in India. From formation to enforcement, everything under the contract is governed by the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The Indian Contract Act, 1872, defines each aspect of a contract very precisely. From the basis of a contract to enforcement, jurisdiction, void and voidable contracts, communication, and acceptance, everything is defined in the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The Indian Contract Act, 1872, is based on the principles of English Common Law. In recent years, various theories about the purpose of contract law have been discussed. Some say it enforces legal obligations and protects the rights of the parties. The guidelines governing the law of contract can be traced back to ancient times. It upholds the same fundamentals and values as traditional law, which is largely based on ethical principles and moral guidelines. The law of contract affects everybody, that is, trade, commerce, and industry. People usually trade to fulfil the lack of resources others have. The term contract is defined under Section 2(h) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, as ‘’An agreement enforceable by law’’. The modern law of contract is a complex and dynamic field.

Essential to a valid contract

Offer and acceptance

For a contract to be legally valid, there must be an offer and an acceptance. The offer is made by one party to the contract and is accepted by the other. The offer must be clear and complete in all senses. Both parties should communicate to ensure there is no lapse in the contract act. Both the offer and acceptance must be “consensus ad idem,” meaning, both parties must comply with the same thing.

Intention to create a legal relationship

Both parties should have the intention of creating a legal relationship that results in an agreement. Agreements of a social or household nature are not contracts because the parties do not intend to build legal relationships.

Legal obligations

One of the key or essential elements of a valid offer is that both parties to the contract must be clear with the intention of creating a legal relationship. This also means that agreements that are not enforceable by law, like agreements between relatives, are not enforceable in court. This is a perfect example of this. The contract should be entered into to fulfil the legal obligations arising out of it.

Consideration

Consideration forms an important part of the contract. Consideration means the value given for the performance of the promise. One of the essentials of a valid consideration is that it should not be adequate, but should carry some value.

 Legal capacity and competency

The Parties to the contract should be legally competent to enter into the contract. They should be of legal age and should not be declared insolvent by the government. They should not be insane.

These are the essential elements of a valid contract that need to be fulfilled before entering into any agreement.  

Modern law of contract

The law of contract has undergone various changes to fit into the current legal system. Modernization has helped improve the overall efficiency of the legal system. Today, all transactions in the business world are governed by contracts. Everything in big business organisations revolves around contracts. Various companies enter into contracts with each other on a daily basis and they hire competent personnel to review and negotiate the contracts. All the clauses are read and understood in the true sense before signing the contract so that no problem occurs in the future. Both parties understand the contract in its true sense and communicate with each other to avoid any irregularities in the future. If any of the terms of the contract are breached by either party, the other party is liable to pay damages or compensation to the other party for the breach of contract. The damages can be paid in various ways. If a contract is breached by either of the parties, then the breach amount is already specified in the contract, which the breaching party needs to pay. An actual breach of contract occurs when the party fails to perform their obligations as specified in the contract at the time performance is due. Examples of actual breaches of contract include non-payment, incomplete performance. In the case of R. Venkataraman vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (1998), the court found that there was an actual breach when the defendant failed to provide a petroleum dealership to the plaintiff.

Traditionally, if someone breaks the contract, the harmed party could ask for money to make up for the promise being broken. But now they are arguing to shift the focus from what has been broken to what the party relied on. If someone breaches a contract, there are several ways to fix it from asking the party for damages for breaching the contract to asking the party to do something specific (delivering what was promised). These two work fine together because the money is supposed to match what the promised thing is worth. The breach of contract allows the aggrieved party to either accept the breach and terminate the contract or affirm the contract and continue with its performance. This type of breach typically occurs when one party refuses or is unable to perform its contractual obligations. In the case of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. Amritsar Gas Service (1991), the court ruled that the defendant’s refusal to pay outstanding dues constituted a repudiatory breach, allowing the plaintiff to terminate the contract.

Now, if we start saying that the money that you get as damages for the breach of a contract is much less than what was promised, people might always want the specific thing to be done instead. This could cause a problem, especially if someone gets a good deal in the first place. Now, the problem is that if we go the way of giving someone the right to demand exactly what was promised (specific performance), then we are going back to the old way of protecting expectations. Then it would lead to getting one party to a contract, a very good deal, even if it is tough for the other party to fulfil it. Also, sometimes asking for promised things isn’t practical; maybe it’s hard for the person who broke the promise. In those cases, the law lets you ask for the money instead. But if we change the rule to only focus on what the party to the contract relied on, then it would create a mess.

One way to solve this mess is to get rid of the option to ask for the promised thing and stick to only asking for money based on reliance. But nobody is suggesting this and most people seem to prefer expanding options rather than limiting them. Contract law is a vast area and it includes various legal obligations to be fulfilled for breach of a contract in modern times. And one of them is quantum meruit. This allows a party to claim a reasonable amount for the work done or services provided before the breach occurred, even if the contract is not completed. Another way is rescission: which means cancelling the contract and treating it as if it never existed. After rescission, both parties are typically required to return any benefits they received under the contract.

Anticipatory breach

Section 39 of the Contract Act specifically addresses anticipatory breach, which is a form of repudiation. It states that if one party to the contract refuses to perform their obligations or makes it impossible to perform, the other party may consider the contract void and claim damages for any loss suffered. In the case of S.B.P. & Co. vs. Patel Engineering Ltd. (2005), the Supreme Court of India held that repudiation must be in clear and unambiguous terms, indicating an intention to not fulfil the contract. The Court also held that repudiation may be inferred from the breaching party’s conduct if it demonstrates a clear intention to not fulfil their obligation. In Maula Bux vs. Union of India (1969), the Court has specifically held that it is true that in every case of breach of contract, the person aggrieved by the breach is not required to prove actual loss or damage suffered by him before he can claim a decree and the Court is competent to award reasonable compensation in a case of breach even if no actual damage is proved to have been suffered in consequence of the breach of contract. The Court has also specifically held that in cases of breach of a contract, it may be impossible for the Court to assess compensation arising from the breach.

Various types of contracts

Over time, specific types of contracts gained prominence due to societal changes and economic advancement. Some of these specific contractual forms include. Partnership contracts, employment contracts, sale and commercial contracts, and government contracts. With the rise of trade and commerce, partnerships emerged as a crucial business structure among people. The Partnership Act, 1932 provides a comprehensive legal framework for the formation, dissolution, rights and liabilities of the parties. Over time, the employment contract has also been popular, as it helps both employer and employee negotiate better and understand each other’s rights, responsibilities, and liabilities. This leads to a significant development in employer and employee relationship. Today, every business, trade, or commercial activity needs a contract to draft the clauses and terms related to it; specifically, without a contract, a big business organisation or any other type of business will find it difficult to do its business or enter into any trade. Countries enter into contracts with each other before carrying out any trade business, or investment work. The international contract covers a wide range of areas, including trade, technology transfer, employment, finance, commerce, etc. International contracts also require compliance with international laws and regulations, such as those set forth by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the United Nations (UN). The international contract has always been a complex topic when it comes to its proper drafting and its jurisdiction.

Principles of interpretation

Plain meaning rule

  • Courts interpret contracts based on the plain meaning of the language used in the contract.
  • The ordinary and usual meaning of the words is given effect.
  • This rule is based on the assumption that the parties to a contract are rational actors who understand the meaning of the words they use.
  • If the language of a contract is clear and unambiguous, the court will not consider extrinsic evidence to interpret the contract.

Contra proferentem rule:

  • Ambiguities in a contract are interpreted against the party who drafted the contract.
  • The drafter is presumed to have had a greater opportunity to clarify the ambiguous terms.
  • This rule is based on the idea that the drafter of a contract is in a better position to understand the meaning of the contract and should bear the risk of any ambiguities.
  • The contra proferentem rule is often used to interpret adhesion contracts, which are contracts that are presented on a take-it-or-leave-it basis.

Parol evidence rule:

  • Parol evidence, such as prior negotiations or oral statements, is generally not admissible to contradict or vary the terms of a written contract.
  • This rule is based on the idea that a written contract is the final and complete expression of the parties’ agreement.
  • The parol evidence rule prevents parties from introducing extrinsic evidence to change the terms of a written contract.
  • There are a few exceptions to the parol evidence rule, such as when the extrinsic evidence is offered to show that the contract was entered into under duress, fraud, or mistake.

Remedies for breach of contract

Compensatory damages:

  • Definition: Compensatory damages are a type of monetary award designed to restore the non-breaching party to the financial position they would have been in if the contract had been performed as agreed.
  • Calculation: Damages are calculated based on the actual losses suffered as a direct result of the breach. This can include out-of-pocket expenses, loss of profits, and other quantifiable losses.
  • Objective: The goal of compensatory damages is to make the non-breaching party whole and to compensate them for the harm caused by the breach, but not to punish the breaching party.

Examples:

  • A contractor breaches a contract to build a house, causing the owner to incur additional costs to complete the project. The owner may be awarded compensatory damages to cover the extra expenses incurred.
  • A supplier fails to deliver goods on time, causing a manufacturer to lose a significant sale. The manufacturer may be entitled to compensatory damages to cover the lost profits.

Specific performance:

  • Definition: Specific performance is a court order that requires the breaching party to fulfil their contractual obligations as agreed.
  • Application: It is typically granted when compensatory damages are inadequate or impractical, or when the subject matter of the contract is unique or has sentimental value.
  • Factors Considered: Courts consider various factors in determining whether to grant specific performance, including the nature of the contract, the feasibility of enforcing the order, and the potential hardship it may cause to either party.

Examples:

  • A seller breaches a contract to sell a rare work of art to a collector. The collector may seek specific performance to compel the seller to deliver the artwork.
  • A landlord breaches a lease agreement by refusing to allow a tenant to occupy the premises. The tenant may be granted specific performance to gain access to the property.

3. Rescission:

  • Definition: Rescission is the cancellation of a contract and the restoration of the parties to their pre-contractual positions.
  • Grounds for Rescission: It is typically granted when the breach is material, meaning it goes to the heart of the contract, or when the contract is voidable due to fraud, misrepresentation, mistake, or undue influence.
  • Effects of Rescission: Upon rescission, all rights and obligations under the contract are extinguished, and the parties are required to return any benefits received under the contract.

Examples:

  • A buyer discovers that a car they purchased has a major mechanical defect that was not disclosed by the seller. The buyer may be entitled to rescission of the contract and a refund of the purchase price.
  • A party enters into a contract under duress or undue influence. The party may be able to rescind the contract and be relieved of their obligations.

Impact of technology on contract formation and execution

Electronic contracts

The advent of modern technology has revolutionised the way contracts are formed and executed. Electronic contracts, such as e-signatures and electronic records, have gained widespread acceptance and have the same legal effect as traditional paper contracts. This has significantly streamlined the contracting process, reducing the need for physical signatures and the exchange of paper documents.

  • E-signatures: E-signatures are electronic signatures that are legally binding and have the same validity as handwritten signatures. They can be used to sign contracts, agreements, and other legal documents electronically, eliminating the need for physical signatures.
  • Electronic records: Electronic records are digital versions of paper documents and are considered legally valid and admissible as evidence in court. This has facilitated the creation, storage, and management of contracts and related documents in electronic format, making it easier to access and retrieve information.

Smart contracts

Smart contracts are innovative digital contracts that use blockchain technology to automate the execution of terms and conditions. They are self-executing contracts stored on a decentralised blockchain network, which ensures their security and immutability.

  • Automated Execution: Smart contracts automatically execute the terms of the contract when certain pre-defined conditions are met, eliminating the need for intermediaries, manual intervention, and enforcement mechanisms.
  • Transparency and Security: Smart contracts are transparent and secure, as the terms of the contract are recorded on the blockchain and can be verified by all participants. The decentralised nature of blockchain technology makes it resistant to manipulation and fraud.

Online dispute resolution

Technology has also transformed the way contract disputes are resolved. Online dispute resolution platforms provide efficient and cost-effective mechanisms for resolving contract disputes without the need for litigation.

  • Online platforms: Online dispute resolution platforms offer a streamlined and user-friendly process for resolving disputes. They provide a secure online environment where parties can negotiate, mediate, and reach settlements without the need for physical meetings or court appearances.
  • Benefits: Online dispute resolution offers several benefits, including reduced costs, faster resolution times, and increased flexibility. It is particularly suitable for cross-border disputes and cases where parties are located in different jurisdictions.

Conclusion

So, contract law itself is a complex term and it has become a very prominent part of the business world. Modern contract law evolves to address new challenges and technologies. Contract laws reflect societal values of equity, justice and fair conscience. Legal advice may be necessary depending on certain complex and specific situations. Over time, there have been specific amendments to contract law according to the need and recent developments.

References

Download Now

Jagpal Singh vs. State of Punjab (2011) 

0

This article is written by Rachna Kumari. This article dives into the case of Jagpal Singh v. State of Punjab in detail and covers the facts, issues, and judgement with a comprehensive analysis of the current positioning of law. 

Introduction 

Since time immemorial, rural communities throughout India have possessed communal lands known by various names, such as gram sabha land, gram panchayat land (in many North Indian States), shamlat deh (in Punjab), mandaveli and poramboke land (in Southern India), maidan, etc., depending on their intended use. These lands, held collectively, serve as essential resources for the villagers’ common benefit. They provide space for ponds for drinking water, bathing the cattle, storage for harvested grain, and grazing grounds for animals such as cows, buffalos and goats. They also serve as playgrounds for children, venues for various religious and matrimonial events of the villagers, melas, water bodies, passages, and sites for cremation or graveyards. 

Historically, these lands were vested in the State through local laws but managed by gram sabhas and gram panchayats to ensure their communal usage. These lands were generally treated as inalienable so that their status as ‘property of the community’ stays preserved and the property remains accessible to all members of the community. 

However, exceptions allowed the gram panchayat to lease out some of the land to landless labourers and members of the scheduled castes/tribes and other marginalised communities, under special circumstances. 

Despite the legal safeguards, such as some, the post-independence era witnessed widespread encroachment upon these communal lands across the nation by influential individuals with muscle power, money power, or political backing. As a result, these lands have been exploited for personal gain, disregarding their original purpose. These unlawful encroachments were accomplished with the active collusion of governmental officials, influential local stakeholders and other criminal elements in society. The case of Jagpal v. State of Punjab(2011) serves as a stark example of this unfortunate reality, highlighting the urgent need to address this egregious state of affairs. 

Details of the case

Name: Jagpal Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Citation: (2011) 11 SCC 396 

Date of the judgement: 28.01.2011

Appellant: Jagpal Singh & Others

Respondent: State of Punjab & Others

Advocates who appeared in this case: R.K. Kapoor, Ms. Neelam Sharma and H.C. Pant

Bench: Markandey Katju and Gyan Sudha Misra, JJ

The judgement was authored by Justice Markandey Katju. 

Facts of Jagpal Singh vs. State of Punjab (2011)

The appeal in this case was filed against the impugned judgement of a division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. 

Undisputedly, the appellants were neither the rightful owners nor the recognised tenants of the land under question, which was identified as a pond situated in Rohar Jagir village, Patiala Tehsil and District Patiala. In fact, the appellants were trespassers and unauthorised occupants of the said land. The appellants filled the community pond with sand and made constructions out of it. 

Application under Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961

The gram panchayat of Rohar Jagir filed an application under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, seeking the removal of the appellants as they had taken unlawful possession of the land. gram panchayat claimed ownership of the disputed land, as evident from the revenue records. The appellants forcibly held the land and started making construction on it. 

Application before the deputy commissioner

Subsequently, an application was moved before the deputy commissioner, informing him about the illegal encroachment. He was informed that the land belonged to the gram panchayat and that the cattle of the villagers had been using the land for drinking, bathing, etc. 

In a surprising turn of events, the collector of Patiala, instead of ordering the eviction of appellants from the property, deemed it not in the public interest to dispossess them.  Rather, the collector directed the gram panchayat to recover the cost of the land from the appellants, as per the collector’s established rates. Thus, the collector colluded in regularising this wrongdoing on the basis that the appellants had invested huge money in constructing a house on the land in question. 

The commissioner affirmed the panchayat’s right over the property and that the pond was being used for the common purpose of the villagers. Hence, it cannot be allowed to be encroached upon by any private persons and any kind of construction over that property is illegal. 

Judgement of Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court

The Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed that the land in dispute belongs to the panchayat and the collector of Patiala was erroneous in directing the gram panchayat to recover the cost of the land from the appellants as a land belonging to the public cannot be sold. 

Issues raised 

Whether the appeal is maintainable or not?

Judgement in Jagpal Singh vs. State of Punjab (2011)

The Hon’ble Supreme Court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it. The Court declared the appellants to be trespassers who had illegally encroached on the land that belonged to the gram panchayat. 

The Court held that such kind of illegalities must be addressed and cannot be condoned. Even if the appellants had built houses on the disputed land; they were ordered to dismantle their constructions and hand over the possession of the land to gram panchayat. The Court also opined that regularising such illegalities should not be permitted because gram Sabha land belongs to the villagers for their common use and should remain so. 

The Court invalidated the letter of regularisation of possession passed by the government of Punjab.

The Court referred to a number of cases to support its decision such as the case of M.I. Builders (P) Ltd. v. Radhey Shyam Sahu(1999), the Supreme Court directed the restoration of a park after the demolition of a shopping complex that was constructed at the cost of more than 100 crores. Similarly, in the case of Friends Colony Development Committee v. State of Orissa & Ors.(2004), the SC held that even where the law allows for regularisation of unsanctioned constructions, such regularisation should only be done in exceptional cases. The Court stated that this principle holds more importance in cases that involve encroachment of a village common land i.e., in the Jagpal case. Further, it stated that regularisation in such cases should only be permitted if the land has been leased to landless labourers or individuals belonging to scheduled castes/scheduled tribes or if the land is actively being utilised for a public purpose such as operating a school, dispensary, park, etc for the villagers. The governmental orders that permit the allotment of gram sabha land to private persons or commercial enterprises on payment of some money were also opined to be illegal and called for ignoring such orders. 

The Court passed a similar order as that of in Hinch Lal Tiwari v. Kamala Devi (2001) where the Court held that land recorded as a pond must not be allowed to be allotted to anybody for the construction of the house or any such purpose. Further, the Court directed the respondents to vacate the illegally occupied land. 

The Court directed all the state governments to prepare schemes for the eviction of illegal occupants of land which belongs to gram panchayat and to give that land back to panchayat for the common use of the villagers. 

Legal aspects involved in Jagpal Singh vs. State of Punjab (2011)

The Hon’ble Supreme Court discussed the encroachment of property belonging to gram panchayat and the regularisation of such illegalities by the government due to the influence of the encroachers. 

When one reads about private individuals encroaching upon the government’s property; one also wonder whether government can take private property of an individual. Article 39(b) of the Constitution states that there are certain principles to be followed by the State which includes: “that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to sub serve the common good.” 

Upon a literal interpretation of the bare text it can be concluded that the State has a power to take away the private property of an individual for the purpose of ‘public use’. Contrary to Article 300-A of the Constitution which states that ‘No person can be deprived of their property except by authority of law.’ The doctrine of eminent domain allows the government to take the property of an individual if it is to be used for public purposes. In the recent case of  DDA v. Jagan Singh & Ors.(2023), the Supreme Court held that land acquired for public purposes cannot be encroached upon. The Court directed the Delhi Development Authority and other authorities to remove a car clinic and other vendors from a pavement built on roads next to a metro station in Delhi. 

Whether “material resources of the community” include private property

Article 39(b) imposes a positive obligation on the State to formulate policies that ensure the “ownership and control of material resources of the community” are so distributed that they “subserve the common good.” 

In the case of State of Karnataka v. Shri Ranganatha Reddy(1977), the Court held that the scope of Article 39(b) is limited and does not include privately owned resources; hence, they do not fall under the ambit of ‘material resources of the community’. Justice Krishna Iyer opined that private and public resources fall within the ambit of ‘material resources of the community’. 

In the case of Sanjeev Coke Manufacturing Company v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.(1982), the SC affirmed the stand of Justice Krishna Iyer and held that ‘material resources of the community’ are not just restricted to public owned resources but also include private owned resources. A nine-judge Bench came to the same conclusion in the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India(1977)

Currently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court is facing the same question and hearing the matter in the case of Property Owners Association v. State of Maharashtra (2024). 

Environmental law and authority of the State

The Supreme Court introduced the idea of public trust doctrine in India in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath(1977). The concept of public trust doctrine imposes an obligation on the State to act as a guard of the natural resources of the country and protect the natural resources from damage. The term ‘public trust doctrine’ inherently contains the idea of trust. A trustee is responsible for taking care of the entrusted property. The trustee is under the duty to act in the best interest of the entruster and not use the property for private gain. In the context of the environment, the State is entrusted by the citizens to protect the natural resources for rational use and for the benefit of society. The State has to exploit the natural resources in such a way that they are not exhausted and future generations are able to use them as well. The public trust doctrine restricts the State from selling natural resources to private individuals. Further, it obligates the State to maintain the resources and not give them to private use. 

In the case of Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. People of the State of Illinois(1892), the Supreme Court of the United States held that the State is a trustee of public resources and cannot give public property for private ownership when the public’s interest is involved. Similarly, in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath(1996), the Supreme Court of India held that the government cannot surrender its authority over public trust resources by converting them to private property. The Court also relied on the famous article titled “The Public Trust Doctrine in Natural Resource Law: Effective Judicial Interventionby Professor Joe Sax, where he reinvented the Roman concept of common property and called it the ‘public trust doctrine’. 

Significance of Jagpal Singh vs. State of Punjab (2011) today

The case of Jagpal v. State of Punjab holds immense importance in recent times due to its judgment against the encroachers of public property. This case is constantly cited by multiple High Courts across the country and by the Supreme Court itself. In the case of Kamalanathan and others v. State and Others(2022), the Madras High Court stated that water bodies play a significant role in maintaining ecology and the environment. Upholding the eviction notice, the Court held that using land that is earmarked as a waterbody for other purposes is detrimental to society. 

In the case of Mehraj Ud Din Malik v. UT of J&K(2022), the Jammu Kashmir & Ladakh High Court held that exchanging proprietary land in lieu of encroached public grazing land is not permitted. 

Upholding a similar judgment as that of the Jagpal case, in the case of V. Vaira Sekar v. The Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise Department and Others (2021), the Madras High Court stated that no person has the right to encroach upon public land. The Court called upon the government to ensure a sense of discipline to ensure that public land remains safe. 

As the Hon’ble Supreme Court gave directions to all the State governments across the country to prepare schemes for eviction of illegal occupants of gram panchayat, the Madhya Pradesh High Court ordered the setting up of ‘Public Land Protection cells’ across the State to check encroachments in the case of Gram Panchayat Dhooma v. State of MP (2021) along with Raghvendra Pratap Singh v. State of M.P(2021)

In the case of Arulmighu Palapattarai Mariamman Tirukoil v. Pappayee & Ors.(2023), the Madras High Court stated that nobody has the right to encroach upon public land and even if God encroaches upon public space, courts will direct the removal of such encroachments since public interest and the rule of law must be safeguarded and upheld. 

Hence, it can be concluded that the Jagpal case holds much importance even today. 

Conclusion 

The encroachment of community property represents a serious threat to the welfare of society and the sustainability of the environment. When private individuals occupy public land illegally, they violate the principles of justice. Such encroachments deprive community members of the opportunity to enjoy the resources that are helpful for their well being. Whether it is land designated for public use, such as parks, playgrounds, etc., or natural resources such as forests, rivers, ponds, etc., the encroachment limits access to these resources for the entire community, leading to a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution. 

This case stands as an example of the challenges faced by the community because of some illegal occupants. The will of the administration to regularise such illegalities is what makes this situation even worse. Despite the intervention of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the presence of powerful members of society who encroach upon public land with the help of money, muscle power or political connections, strict action to address these issues has been lacking. It is important for states to take proactive measures to prevent such encroachments on public property. Even after twelve years of judgment and directions, the failure of states to formulate a proper administrative system to tackle encroachments demands the urgent need for collective action at all levels of governance. It is only through collective efforts that we can safeguard public property and enjoy it. 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Can adverse possession be claimed on governmental property?

Yes, according to the Limitation Act, 1965, any person in possession of private land for over 12 years or government land for over 30 years can become the owner of that property. However, in the case of Shakeel Ahmad and Ors v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors (2024), the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has observed that people settling on government land cannot claim any title rights to such land only on the ground of adverse possession. 

Why do all States have different Acts and rules with regard to encroachment of land belonging to panchayat?

All states have different Acts, rules and regulations with regard to encroachment of land because each State has the power to make its own laws on land related issues based on specific local needs, and socioeconomic, administrative and political factors. 

Can a criminal case be filed for encroachment on governmental land?

Yes, a criminal case can be filed under Section 441 of the Indian Penal Code (Section 329 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2024). In the case of S. Arunachallam v. District Collector, Collectorate, Salem District and Others (2019), the Madras High Court ordered in favour of eviction of encroachers from public land. 

Which list empowers states to make laws on land acquisition, etc. under the Constitution of India?

The Concurrent list in the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution allows both state legislatures and the Union government to make laws on land acquisition and related matters. However, if there’s a conflict, union laws override state laws. 

References


Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Download Now
logo
FREE & ONLINE 3-Day Bootcamp (LIVE only) on

How Can Experienced Professionals Become Independent Directors

calender
28th, 29th Mar, 2026, 2 - 5pm (IST) &
30th Mar, 2026, 7 - 10pm (IST).
Bootcamp starting in
Days
HRS
MIN
SEC
Abhyuday AgarwalCOO & CO-Founder, LawSikho

Register now

Abhyuday AgarwalCOO & CO-Founder, LawSikho