TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 820
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1, claiming compassionate appointment. The claim of the writ petitioner was rejected on the ground that only the dependants of the Part-Time Contingent Employees, who die before attaining the age of 60 years are eligible to be considered for compassionate appointment in terms of the industrial settlement entered into between the Kerala State Electricity Board and its employees, in 2007. 2. The writ petitioner contended, inter alia, that the provisions of the long term settlement were in direct conflict with Statutory Regulations framed by the erstwhile Kerala State Electricity Board in the exercise of the powers conferred by S. 79 r/w. S. 15 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. These regulations, which are produced as Ext. P2 along wit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....titioner's mother, died on 21.3.2011, the question of applying Ext. P2 regulation, which was framed under the repealed provisions of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, does not arise as on the relevant date the provisions of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 stood repealed by the provisions of the Electricity Act of 2003. He would contend that unless the provisions of subordinate legislation framed under the provisions of the repealed enactment are specifically saved by the repealing Act, the subordinate legislation cannot have any legal effect after repeal. Mr. Raju Joseph refers to State of U.P. v. Hirendra Pal Singh, (2011) 5 SCC 305) and in particular to paragraph 22 of that judgment which reads as follows:- "It is a sett....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....writ petitioner was liable to be considered, de hors the prohibition contained in Ext. R2(a) settlement. He would refer to S. 3(51) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 to contend that Ext. P2 Regulations would continue to apply as S. 3(51) defines 'Rule' to include 'Regulation' and 'Rules' are saved under sub-section (2) of S. 185. He would also state that it is clear from a reading of sub-section (5) of S. 185 that the operation of S. 6 of the General Clauses Act is clearly intended notwithstanding anything in sub-section (2) of S. 185. He would also contend that the decision of the learned Single Judge in Rita Bella's case (supra) has been confirmed by a Division Bench of this Court through judgment dated 28.7.201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce made or issued or any appointment, confirmation or declaration made or any license, permission, authorization or exemption granted or any document or instrument executed or any direction given under the repealed laws shall, in so far as it is not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, be deemed to have been done or taken under the corresponding provisions of this Act." The provisions of sub-section (2), obviously cannot apply to save Ext. P.2 Regulations, in the manner suggested by the learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner as, obviously, the said provision can apply only to past actions under any of the repealed enactments. A reading of S. 185(2)(a), suggests that things, which have already been done will be saved insofar as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the effect of repeals." Sub-section (5) of S. 185, on our reading, only makes it clear that the specific mention and saving of certain enumerated provisions/rules in sub-section (2) does did not mean that the effect of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 was inapplicable in respect of provisions not so enumerated. In Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. v. Amrit Lal & Co., (2001) 8 SCC 397), it was held:- 25. The opening words of Section 6 specify the field over which it is operative. It is operative overall the enactments under the General Clauses Act, Central Act or Regulations made after the commencement of the General Clauses Act. It also clarifies in case of repeal of any provision under the aforesaid Act or regulation,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roceedings unaffected which commenced under the unrepealed provisions unless contrary intention is expressed. We find clause (c) of Section 6, refers the words "any right, privilege, obligation ... acquired or accrued" under the repealed statute would not be affected by the repealing statute. We may hasten to clarify here, mere existence of a right not being "acquired" or "accrued" on the date of the repeal would not get protection of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act. (emphasis is ours) We are clear in our minds that the provisions of S. 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 cannot come to the aid of the writ petitioner. 9. The contention of the Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner that the terms of Ext. R2(a) settlement are no....