9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenge to nomination papers for executive committee election of Bengal Chamber of Commerce. Whether Bengal Chamber of Commerce qualifies as a State under Article 12 of the Constitution. Analysis: The petitioners, as authorized representatives of two companies, challenged the second set of nomination papers filed by the outgoing managing committee of the Bengal National Chamber of Commerce. They sought a declaration that the previously filed nomination papers for office bearers and ordinary members should be considered elected to the executive committee. Additionally, they requested a writ mandating the holding of the annual general meeting and confirming the election of the mentioned members to the executive committee as per the Chamber's articles. The argument presented was that the Bengal Chamber of Commerce should be considered a State under Article 12 of the Constitution due to its activities being non-profit-making, its autonomy, and historical authorizations to send representatives to legislative bodies. However, the court rejected this contention, emphasizing that for an entity to be classified as a State under Article 12, it must be an authority whose orders citizens are bound to obey. The court clarified that statutory authorities with governmental functions, such as the Steel Authority of India or Life Insurance Corporation of India, fall under the definition of "authority" as per the Constitution. Referring to legal precedents, the court highlighted that bodies created under general statutes like the Companies Act, even if granted licenses, cannot be equated to local authorities or States under Article 12. The court emphasized that the term "authority" encompasses entities with quasi-governmental powers administering revenue-producing public enterprises. Consequently, the Bengal Chamber of Commerce, despite its historical significance and privileges, does not meet the criteria to be considered a State under Article 12. Concluding that the challenge against the Bengal Chamber of Commerce's actions is not maintainable since it does not qualify as a State under Article 12, the court dismissed the application. The petitioners' claims were rejected, and no costs were awarded in this matter.
|
