H.L. Trehan v. Union of India
(1989) 1 SCC 764: AIR 1989 SC 568

 

Case Summary and important points

H.L. Trehan v. Union of Asian country
(1989) one SCC 764: AIR 1989 SC 568

Introduction :-
The present case was determined by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that arose against the judgement of the city court whereby the court has quashed a circular dated eighth March, 1978 issued by the Board of administrators of Caltex refinery (India) Ltd. (hereinafter ‘CORIL’), a Government Company, on the judicial writ petition filed by the workers of CORIL in 1978 on the bottom of violation of Principles of Natural Justice.

Brief Facts:-
The Parliament enacted The Caltex (Acquisition of Shares of Caltex purification (India) Ltd. and of the undertakings in Asian country of Caltex (India) Ltd.), Act seventeen of 1977. The Act provided for the acquisition of shares of CORIL and for the acquisition and transfer of the proper, title and interest of Caltex (India) Ltd. in reference to its Undertakings in Asian country. The shares of the CORIL was transferred to and unconditional within the Central Government. Section 11(2) of the Act only if each whole-time officer or alternative worker of CORIL would on the appointed day still be an official or alternative worker of CORIL on an equivalent terms and conditions and with an equivalent rights to pension, gratuity and alternative. the current case arose once the impugned circular was issued on March eight, 1978 by the Chairman of the Board of administrators of CORIL rationalizing the perquisites admittable to the Management employees within the manner expressed within the same circular. a number of the workers of CORIL filed a judicial writ petition within the city court difficult the lawfulness and validity of the impugned circular.


Issue:the most issue concerned within the case was whether or not the post-decisional chance of hearing when the supply of impugned circular would quantity to violation of Principles of natural justice?


Judgment:-
It was contended before the Hon’ble court that underneath the same circular the terms and conditions of service of the workers of CORIL had been well and adversely altered to their prejudice. They additional contended that the workers not having been given a chance of being detected before neutering to their prejudice the terms and conditions of service, the impugned circular ought to be stricken down as void being against the principles of natural justice. The Hon’ble court took the read that as no chance was given to the workers of CORIL before the impugned circular was issued, the Board of administrators of CORIL acted lawlessly and in violation of the principles of natural justice. therein read of the matter, the court quashed the impugned circular.
Then the matter came before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in charm. it’s not controversial that the workers weren’t given any chance of being detected before the impugned circular was issued. it had been contended on behalf of the CORIL that a chance of hearing was given to the workers when the impugned circular was issued. The Hon’ble Supreme Court rejected that competition and same that the post-decisional chance of hearing doesn’t sub-serve the foundations of natural justice. The Hon’ble Supreme Court additional same that after a choice has been taken, there’s an inclination to uphold it and a illustration might not yield any fruitful purpose. Thus, although any hearing was given to the workers of CORIL when the supply of the impugned circular, that might not be any compliance with the foundations of natural justice or avoid the mischief of flightiness as contemplated by Article fourteen of the Constitution. The Apex Court referred the observation of K.I. Shephard v. Union of Asian country [(1987) four SCC 431 during which Ranganath Misra, J. discovered that “there isn’t any justification to consider a post-decisional hearing. the chance of illustration may be a condition precedent to action.”

Decision– The Hon’ble Supreme Court control that the court was absolutely even in quashing the impugned circular.



Comment:–
This case maintained the authority of the landmark judgement of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of Asian country [(1978) one SCC 248]. The Principles of natural simply ice may be a extremely effective tool devised by the courts to change a statutory authority to gain a just call and it’s calculated to act as a healthy check on abuse or misuse of power. In my respectful submission, the Hon’ble Court pellucidly maintained that the reach shouldn’t be narrowed and its pertinency circumscribed. this can be a leading light for the protection from the untied and capricious exercise of power by the executive authorities that have an effect on the elemental rights. This call encompasses a vital and very important impact within the development of still rising law.

By

LUV AMAN

H.L. Trehan And Ors. Etc vs Union Of India And Others. Etc on 22 November, 1988 Equivalent citations: 1989 AIR 568, 1988 SCR Supl. (3) 925

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *