KAPILA HINGORANI versus STATE OF BIHAR

Citation: [2005] 1 S.C.R. 456 · Decided: 13-01-2005 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N. SANTOSH HEGDE, S.B. SINHA

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
KAPILA HINGORANI 
v. 
ST A TE OF BIHAR 
JANUARY 13, 2005 
B 
[N. SANTOSH HEGDE AND S.B. SINHA, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, I 950: 
Article 2 I-Employees of Public Sector Undertakings in States of Bihar 
C and Jharkhand-Non-payment of salary for a long time-leading to loss of 
lives-Order of Supreme Court*-Interim applications for implementation of-
Held, human right and fundamental right of employees are to be protected by 
State-State has a constitutional obligation and acts in a fiduciary capacity 
vis-a-vis performance of its constitutional duties and functions by the public 
D sector undertakings as it has constitutional obligations in relation thereto--
State of Bihar in response to the applications filed by the petitioner cannot be 
permitted to raise questions which have expressly been rejected-It cannot 
seek a review of the said judgment indirectly which it could not do directly--
Even for such matters, an application for clarification would not be 
maintainable-state of Bihar cannot take a stand now that it does not have 
E any constitutional obligation towards a section of citizens, viz. the employees 
of the public sector undertakings who have not been paid salaries for years-
/ts plea that the directions issued were only one-time direction can also not 
be accepted-In clause 4 of the direction, it was clearly stated that the State 
for the present shall deposit a sum of Rs. 50 crores before the High Court for 
p disbursement of salaries to the employees of the Corporation and the matter 
was directed to be listed again-The directions of this Court could not be 
complied with having regard to the fact that only six crores were left with the 
Committee-It is true that a new corporation named as JHALCO has come 
into being, but keeping in view of the fact that the State of Jharkhand itself 
has given option to the employees of BHALCO, the order of absorption of 
G those employees who opt for employment may be passed at an early date-The 
employees concerned need not file any undertaking at this stage as the question 
as to whether the State of Jharkhand is liable to pay any salary and other 
emoluments to the employees of BHALCO is a question which would fall for 
decision in an appropriate proceeding-Keeping in view the fact that despite 
H 
456 
f _}-
• 
,_. 
)> 
>i 
) 
l ... 
KAPILA HINGORANI v. STA TE 
457 
this Court's order dated 6th May, 2003, five persons have lost their lives A 
owing to non-payment of salaries and keeping in view the order of the Central 
Government dividing the assets and liabilities between the States of Bihar and 
Jharkhand in relation to certain State Undertakings, State of Bihar is directed 
to deposit a sum of Rs.jO crores and the State of Jharkhand a sum of Rs.2j 
crores-The Committee constituted by the Patna High Court would continue B 
to function-The Patna High Court and the Jharkhand High Court would pass 
appropriate orders in the liquidation proceedings filed by the States of Bihar 
or Jharkhand, as the case may be, as expeditiously as possible-Any amount 
paid to the employees concerned shall be subject to the orders passed by the 
appropriate court of law in this behalf and the amount so paid to them shall 
be duly credited. 
c 
In its order dated 9th May, 2003 *, this Court considered the matter 
from the human rights aspect as also the fundamental rights of the employees 
of the public sector undertakings operating in the State of Bihar-It is made 
clear that these directions have not been issued to the Stales of Bihar and 
Jharkhand on the premise that they are bound to pay the salaries of the D 
employees of the public sector undertakikngs but on the ground that the 
employees have a human right as also a fundamental right under Article 2 I 
which the State is bound to protect-These directions as also the directions 
issued by this Court on 9th May, 2003* are in furtherance of the human and 
fundamental rights of the employees concerned and not by way of an E 
enforcement of their legal right to arrears of salaries-The amount of salary 
payable to the concerned employees or workmen would undoubtedly be 
adjudicated upon in the proper proceedings. 
* Kapila Hingorani v. Stale of Bihar, (2003) Supp. 1 SCR, relied on. 
Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Ors. v. National Union Waterfront F 
Workers and Ors., (2001) 7 SCC 1 and Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. 
and Ors. v. Secretary Revenue Department, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh and Ors., 
(1999) 4 sec 458, refe

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.