1994 (7) TMI 228

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Latex (P.) Ltd., respondent No. 2 herein, impugns the termination of his service communicated by Letter No. PLL/Staff/103/94, dated May 10, 1994 (exhibit P-3). At the stage of admission, the respondents appeared through counsel, filed a counter-affidavit and urged that Periyar Latex (P.) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the company") is not State or "any authority", for the purposes of articles 12 and 226 of the Constitution of India, and that, therefore, this petition is incompetent. I have heard counsel on this point. I have not gone into the merits of this case. The petitioner contends that the Rubber Board which holds more than 50 per cent. shares in the company and controls it, is an instrumentality of the Central Government, and, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nferred by the State, (c)the functions of the corporation are governmental or public functions, (d)substantial amount of financial assistance is received from the State, and (e)statutory duties are imposed upon the company. Now consider the constitution of the company and its objects as they emerge from the articles of association. The following features are clear: (i)Membership of the corporation is limited to ; (a) the Rubber Board, (b) rubber purchasers' societies, (c) rubber processing co-operative societies, (d) rubber marketing co-operative societies, and (e) industrial, agricultural or financial institutions, owned or controlled by the Central or State Governments. (ii)The maximum number of directors is nine. The board of dire....