| Citation | (2013) SCC |
| Date of Judgment | 17TH April 2013 |
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Case Type | Civil Appeal No.2147 of 2010 |
| Appellant | Jatya Pal Singh and Ors |
| Respondent | Union Of State and Ors |
| Bench | Surinder Singh Nijjar and Anil R. Dave |
| Referred | Article 12, 32 and 226 of Indian Constitution |
FACTS OF THE CASE
A writ petition No.2652 of 2007 was filed in the Bombay High Court by the appellant but on 8th September, 2009 was dismissed by the Division Bench.
Then former employees of the Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited(VSNL) filed ten writ petitions in Delhi High Court. The former employees believed that VSNL is a state within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and not any private body and VSNL (Now Tata Communication Limited) believes that the company is a private body and therefore doesn’t come under the Article 12 as state. On 29th August, 2011 the learned single judge dismissed the writ petitions by judgment and order.
Later the case was moved to supreme court by VSNL Scheduled Castes/Tribes Employees welfare samiti(Regd.) through writ petition of mandamus.
Background of The Case
During 1992 to 2000, Government of India diluted a huge amount of shares of VSNL (Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited) as was listed on Indian stock exchange and New York stock exchange and majority of that was brought by TATA Company and being the majority shareholder of the company, Tata Company changed its name to Tata Communication Limited.
The Government of India ensured with the Tata Group that none of the employees should be retrenched for a period of one year according to the share holding agreement and share purchase agreement. Clause of the agreement: –
- 5.13: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, the Strategic Partner shall not cause the Company to retrench any of the employees of the Company for a period of 1 one year from the closing other than any dismissal or termination of employees of the company from their employment in accordance with the applicable staff regulations and standing orders of the Company or applicable law.
On 16th July, 2007 and 4th October, 2007 20 managerial employees were terminated after paying advance 3 months’ salary in lieu of notice. The termination was done due to the clause 1.6 of the appointment letter which reads as:
- 1.6: After confirmation, your appointment may be terminated by either side at any time by giving three months’ notice in writing. VSNL however, reserve the right of terminating your services forthwith or before expiry of the stipulated period of notice of 3 months by making payment to you of a sum equivalent to the pay and allowances for the period of notice or unexpired portion thereof. The decision of the management shall not be question.
After the termination letter was issued, 10 employees went to Delhi High Court to file writ petition but the Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition and 2 employees went to Bombay High Court to file writ petition but resulted into dismissal of the petition.
ISSUES
- Whether the VSNL (now Tata Communication limited) comes under the article 12 of the Indian constitution to act as state?
ARGUMENTS
When this appeal was scheduled for a preliminary hearing Mr. T.N. Razdan, learned counsel of the appellant presented that VSNL cannot be called an absolute private entity as union of India still hold 26.97% and other government companies hold 17.35% shares in the company. Tata company holds majority of the shares but as some shares are there with government companies and as there is a presence of government in the company it can be considered as the state under the article 12 of the Indian constitution.
In addition to it Dr. K.S. Chauhan another counsel also iterated that although Union of India holds minority shares in the company but still has got control over the VSNL/TCL. And it cannot be further sold in the market to other instead can only be sold back to the government and if there is any decision that has to be taken within the company for the company cannot be done without prior information or discussion with the government.
JUDGEMENT
According to Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, Freedom of speech and expression and right to communication is a facet of it and due to which it is a bounded duty of Government Of India to provide uninterrupted Telecommunication Services so that people can effectively exercise the right. This duty was performed by VSNL.
Now Tata company is the owner of the company and is charging the amount for the service they are providing hence they cannot be considered as state under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution whether they hold some amount of shares in the company.
Hence the Court came to the conclusion that VSNL cannot be considered as the state and mandamus writ petition can be filed against the state and not on the private body hence the writ petition was quashed.
REFERENCES
This Article is written by Ayush Singh of Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Avadh University, Intern at Legal Vidhiya.
