Harsh judicial strictures must be exceptional; Electricity Board's legal stand on government direction power was not blameworthy.

The Supreme Court held that the Electricity Board could not be faulted for contesting the State Government's attempt to secure an employee's absorption, because the scope of the Government's policy-direction power under Section 78-A of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 was at least debatable. On that footing, the Board's legal stand did not justify judicial condemnation. The Court also reiterated that harsh strictures against parties or institutions should be made only in exceptional circumstances, and none existed here. The High Court's harsh observations against the Board were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the harsh observations made by the High Court against the Electricity Board and its should be set aside.

Analysis: The dispute arose from the State Government's attempt to secure absorption of an employee in the Electricity Board, but the Board resisted on the footing that it was an autonomous body and that the Government could not direct such appointment. The Court noted that the question whether the Government's directions fell within the scope of the policy-direction power under Section 78-A of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 was at least debatable, and the Board could not be condemned for taking that legal stand. The Court further reiterated that harsh strictures should be avoided except in exceptional circumstances, which were not present here.

Conclusion: The harsh observations made by the High Court were set aside.

---