81(2) Of the Defence of India Rules. 11B of the Order decreasing the prices already fixed for all categories of steel by Rs. Crirminal cases were started against the company, its three directors, its general 628 manager and two sales-men under cl. " On the facts the conclusion of the majority was that the strike was illegal in its inception and prosecution. If it is found thereafter that such a sentence was not warranted, that would be of no use as the life of that person cannot be brought back.

We have already shown that this form of challenge has not been adopted by the respondents. The first factor mentioned above, in support of our conclusion, is more fundamental than the second one. In so far as the argument proceeds on the assumption that the authority conferred on the Controller by cl. 11B is uncanalised or unbridled or unguided, we have already held that the clause does not suffer from any such infirmity. On behalf of the respondent it was contended that the Special Officer has not erred in holding that the existence of a nuisance of the kind mentioned in s.

3 and 4 are valid and cl. This was really not the exercise of the right to strike to which the Act referred. 3 and 4 of the Act are ultra vires, and if that is so neither the Order subsequently issued nor cl. Death penalty is irreversible in nature. 11B nor the fixation of prices would be valid. That is why he was not prepared to reverse the order of reinstatement passed by the Board. protection of employees' right to self-organisation and to the selection of representatives of their own choosing for collective bargaining without restraint or coercion.

Tht being so, we feel that a limited oral hearing een at the review stage is mandated by Art. We will presently refer to these decisions; but before we do so we may mention the material facts on which the contention is raised. 11B do-es nothing more than prescribe conditions for the exercise of the delegate's authority which are consistent with s. 11B in particular is invalid as offending Arts. On December 10, 1949, the Iron and Steel Controller issued a notification under cl.

On the other hand, the learned Solicitor-General has contended that the decision of this Court in the case of Harishankar Bagla (2) in effect concludes the controversy between the parties in the present appeals. The Bank naturally relies upon the majority decision in support of its contention that its employees who participated in the pen-down strike are not entitled to reinstatement. 19 it is difficult to see how this clause by itself can be said to violate Art. 7 of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946, on the allegation that they had sold their old stock of steel for prices higher than those prescribed by the said notification.

Their contention was that cl. The challenge to the validity of the criminal proceedings pending against the respondents can be made on three alternative grounds; it can be urged that ss. Let us therefore consider whether it is open to the respondents to challenge the said price structure in the present appeals. 842 would not have enjoyed had they remained at work. 3(1) of the Act and the statement of facts which constitute the grounds envisaged by S.

The conclusion, therfore, was that to provide for the reinstatement or re-employment of employees guilty of the acts which even according to the Board had been committed would not only not effectuate any policy of the Act but would directly tend to make abortive its plan for peaceable procedure. Once a death sentence is executed, that results in taking away the life of the convict. 19(1)(f) and (i) of the Constitution.

The respondent company was registered a stock-holder under the Iron and Steel (Control of Production and Distribution) Order, 1941 issued by the Central Government in exercise of its powers under r. Therefore, the right to file Review Petition is a valuable right given to the convicts who are imposed death penalty. 3 it is only the actual price structure fixed by the Controller which in a given case can be successfully challenged as violative of Art.

30 per ton was directed is itself unreasonable and violative of Arts. Held, that the High Supreme Court India lawyers, had overlooked the difference between the objects of detention specified in cls. " It was also held that " the Congress was intent upon ,. 11B on the ground that it violates Art. The respondents moved the High Court under Art. Now in regard to the challenge to cl. This being so, we feel that if the fundamental right to life is involved, any procedure to be just, fair and reasonable should take into account the two factors mentioned above.

It is with this argument that we are at present concerned: or, alternatively it can be urged that the actual fixation of prices by which a flat reduction of Rs. It was an illegal seizure of the building in order to prevent their use by the employer in a lawful manner, and thus by acts of force and violence compel the employer to submit. 11B of the Order was invalid and unconstitutional as it violated Arts.

226 of the Constitution for quashing the said criminal proceedings. 21 in all death sentence cases. It can also be urged that either the whole of the Order issued by the Central Government or cl. 153A(1) of the Act was a matter for the subjective satisfaction of the respondent Municipality and beyond the scope of his enquiry. 11B by itself we do not see bow it would be possible to hold that the said clause is violative of Art. Justice Reed, who delivered a dissenting judgment thought that both labour and management had erred grievously in their respective conduct and so it would not be unreasonable to restore both to their former status.