CHANDRASHEKHAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was selected and appointed as labour welfare officer, grade III, by the management of the Ajudhia Sugar Mills in the district of Moradabad. As the petitioner was more than twenty-six years of age he applied to the State Government for exemption from the age restriction. The State Government by its order, dated 27 October 1971, granted exemption to the petitioner from the requisite qualification of age. The petitioner thereafter continued in service On 25 August 1972, the State Government, however, passed another order cancelling the exemption granted to the petitioner. The petitioner made a representation to the State Government for the review of its order, dated 25 August 1972. The State Government refused to review the order and rejected the petitioner's application by its order, dated 31 August 1973. The petitioner thereupon filed this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the orders of the State Government, dated 25 August 1972 and 31 August 1973.

(2.) Section 49 of the Factories Act, 1948, requires every factory employing five hundred or more workers to appoint welfare officers. The State Government is empowered to prescribe qualifications and conditions of service of labour welfare officers. In pursuance of the said requirement the State Government of Uttar Pradesh framed Factories Welfare Officers' Rules, 1955, prescribing qualifications and other conditions of service of the welfare officers. Rule 9 lays down that no person shall be appointed, as a welfare officer unless he fulfills the qualifications mentioned therein. Rule 9 contains five Cls. (a) to (e), which lay down that a person must be a citizen of India or a subject of Sikkim and he must be within the age group as mentioned in CI. (h) and he must have thorough Knowledge of Hindi in Devenagari script under CI. (d) and he must possess a degree of a university established by law in case of appointment to grade III under CI. (d). Clause (e) requires that he must possess diploma of Labour Training College or social science class or social technique from the institutions named therein. Rule 13 confers powers on the State Government to exempt any person from all or any of the qualifications prescribed in rule 9 if such person is a graduate of a university established by law and has three years practical experience of work relating to labour well are in the case of grade I, two years in the case of grade II and one year in the case of grade III. Rule 13 confers power on the State Government to grant exemption from all or any of the qualifications prescribed in rule 9 in case of only those persons who fulfilled the two conditions prescribed therein. The petitioner prior to his selection and appointment in the Ajudhia Sugar Mills was employed as assistant welfare organizer in the Coal Mines Welfare Organization under the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, for a period of three and a half years. While working as assistant welfare officer in the coal mines the petitioner had acquired three years practical experience of work relating to the welfare of labour. He holds a degree in Master of Arts in Political Science and also holds the Degree of Master of Social Work from the University of Agra. The petitioner, therefore, fulfilled the two requisite qualifications necessary to claim exemption under rule 13. The State Government found the petitioner entitled to exemption and thereupon it issued the order, dated 27 October 1971, granting exemption to the petitioner under rule 13 read with rule 9 (b) (iii),

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the order of the State Government, dated 27 August 1972, was passed in violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity of hearing or explanation :on behalf of the State Government it is not disputed that the petitioner was not given any opportunity prior to the issue of the order, dated 25 August 1972. An order granting exemption under rule 13 of the Factories Welfare Officers' Rules, 1955, is no doubt an administrative order and it is open to the State Government to review or revise the same if the order is found to have been issued on account of any misrepresentation, fraud or mistake. Any order issued under rule 13 granting exemption from any of the qualifications prescribes in rule 9 confers right on the person co secure employment as welfare officer and any subsequent order passed by the State Government cancelling that exemption granted by it earlier would adversely affect the right of the person concerned. In this view, it is imperative for the State Government to afford opportunity to the person concerned against whom the order of review may be passed cancelling the exemption granted in his favour. No doubt the rules do not contain any provision for review or for affording any opportunity to the person concerned but it is well settled that whenever the right of a person is affected by the order passed by a statutory authority it must act in accordance with the principles of natural justice. As the order of cancellation would affect the rights of person in whose favour the exemption may have been granted it is necessary for the State Government to afford opportunity to the person concerned. Any order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice would be illegal and void. In the instant case State Government's order, dated 25 August 1972, was passed without affording any opportunity to the petitioner, therefore, the order is rendered void.