A VAIDYANATHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ of declaration declaring R. 8(2) of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957 as unconstitutional and directing the 2nd respondent to grant membership to the petitioner without imposing any unreasonable and arbitrary terms.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is briefly stated hereunder :- According to him, he is well qualified with a Bachelor in Engineering and Master's Diploma in Business Management. Because of his Master's decree in Business Management, particularly in finance and marketing, he is interested in the business of trading and securities. He is fully qualified to take up a career in the business of dealing in securities. However, by virtue of certain provisions of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 and the Rules made thereunder and by virtue of the bye-laws/Articles of Association of the Stock Exchanges, the entry of proficient men into this field of business was effectively being prevented by vested interests. The second respondent did not take step to implement the directives of the High Powered Committee headed by Mr. G. S. Patel. For two years after these directives, the 2nd respondnet did not take steps to implement these directives, but only flooded the exchange with persons of their own choice. Later, the 2nd respondent herein, by advertisements in Newspaper made in September, 1987, invited applications from two categories of persons, viz., (i) Post Graduate Degree holders in Commerce, Economics and Business Administration from recognised/approved Universities/Institutions and Members of Professional Bodies such as the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. The Institute of Costs and Works Accountants of India and the Institute of Company Secretaries of India and (2) persons, who have a pass in Plus Two or XII Standard Examination with an experience of 3 years in the business of shares and securities. He sent his application in the prescribed format along with an Earnest Money Deposit of Rs. 5,000/-. He was called for an interview on 24-5-88 by the 2nd respondent herein. The applicants were not seeking any employment, but were only entering into a business, which cannot be curtailed by way of interview or other selection procedures. The petitioner and his father initially filed a writ petition, namely, W. P. No. 1573/87 under Article 32 of the Constitution of India against the respondents herein, which is pending in the Supreme Court of India. The writ peittion which was filed challenging the constitutional validity of the various provisions of the Securiteis Contracts (Regulation) Act and the Rules made thereunder, was withdrawn by them on 1-8-88. After the withdrawal of the writ petition, he received a communication dated 29-7-88 from the 2nd respondent, informing him that his application was not considered favourably. No reasons were mentioned in the said letter, for not considering his application favourably. By this letter, the opportunity of carrying on business in shares and securities, has been denied to him and in such circumstance, he has approached this Court as stated above. The first set of relief is sought by him both as a person aggrieved and as by way of public interest litigation.

(3.) None of the respondents have chosen to file a counter affidavit.