Port Trust labourers win case

The Supreme Court has set aside the judgment of the Calcutta high court and ruled in favour of the contract labourers working for the Kolkata Port Trust. The port authorities have given a project of laying rail lines to government-owned RITES. The central government had issued a notification under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act in 2005 prohibiting employment of contract labour in the works of railway tracks in the port trust. The contract labourers, who were working for two decades without permanent status, wanted abolition of the contract labour system. While they moved the high court, the port trust also approached the high court to quash the notification. The high court held that the notification would not affect the work handed over to RITES. The workers appealed to the Supreme Court in the case, Baleshwar Rajabanshi vs Board of Trustees. The Supreme Court, while overruling the high court, remarked that the high court judgment was written in a "highly casual and off-hand manner", simply accepting the version of the port trust that the work was done by a government company.

Land acquisition quashed
The Supreme Court has quashed the acquisition of land belonging to Usha Stud and Agricultural Farms Ltd by the Haryana Government as the decision of the chief minister was not in accordance with the rules laid down by the Land Acquisition Act. Moreover, the Chief Minister's decision was also discriminatory as other firms which owned land in the same village, Carterpuri in Gurgaon, had been returned the acquired land. The Punjab and Haryana high court had earlier dismissed the petition of the stud farm. The Supreme Court set aside the high court judgment and observed that the "decision taken at the level of the Chief Minister was not in consonance with the scheme of the Act." The main reasons given in the judgment were that the land owner was not given a fair hearing, the government did not apply its mind to the report of the Collector and discrimination against the farm company.

Rural banks lose appeal

The Supreme Court last week dismissed the appeals of Rani Laxmibai Kshetriya Gramin Bank and some other regional rural banks sponsored by various nationalised banks in a dispute with regard to promotion of officers who have not done well in their annual performance report or have faced misconduct charge in the five preceding years. The affected officers challenged two circulars in the Allahabad high court as they had allegedly debarred them totally for promotion. Some sponsoring banks like Punjab National Bank and Bank of Baroda had also issued 'clarifications' with regard to the service rules. The Allahabad high court allowed the officers' petitions and rejected the stand of the banks. The banks approached the Supreme Court. It dismissed their appeals, observing that the officers concerned may be considered for promotion.

Company has no mind
Since a company cannot have a mind it cannot be held guilty of the offences of cheating and defamation. A director or an officer of the company cannot be made vicariously liable for such offences, the Delhi high court has stated in the case, Raymond Ltd vs Rameswhar Dwarkadas Ltd, while quashing the summons to the company directors. The high court stated that to make a person liable for the offence of defamation, the person complaining must prove that the accused made any imputation concerning any person intending to harm such person. In this case, the complaint did not specify any role to the directors. The dispute was with reference to a case in the Bombay high court over the trade mark 'Sunstar'. Raymonds published certain advertisements regarding the court orders which allegedly affected the reputation of the opposite party. It moved criminal cases against Raymonds Ltd and seven of its directors. They appealed to the high court to quash the summons. The court did so and stated that since the civil dispute over the trademark has been settled, the criminal complaint cannot be sustained.

Arbitration petition dismissed
The Bombay high court has dismissed the arbitration petition moved by Hindustan Wires Ltd seeking to end the mandate of the arbitrator nominated under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act and pleading for reference of the disputes to the Micro and Small Scale Enterprises Facilitation Council constituted under the provisions of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act. The dispute was over amounts allegedly withheld by Indian Oil Corporation for LPG cylinders supplied to it. For six years, there were disputes over the nomination of the arbitrators, who changed several times. Ultimately, Hindustan Wires moved an application stating that since there was undue delay and it was a registered unit under the above Development Act, the dispute should be referred to the council. The high court rejected the contention that the arbitration proceedings were delayed beyond deadline, pointing out that Hindustan Wires had participated in the proceedings and agreed to extensions. It also stated that arbitration under the agreement will continue despite the Development Act.