AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
LATE Capt. Kirpal Singh, the deceased husband of the complainant-respondent Smt. Suvinder Kaur, had been working with the Rajasthan State Flying School, Rajasthan, Jaipur (the "School") as Chief Pilot Instructor since 8.4.1991. Considering him being liable to be insured under the Rajasthan Government Servant''s Insurance Rules, 1953 (the "Rules 1953"), Endowment Assurance Policy No. 720649 was issued to him and deductions of the amounts of premium, payable towards that policy, were regularly made from his monthly pay-bills by his said employer and paid to the appellant, a department of the Govt. of Rajasthan, rendering such insurance services to its employees. The respondent was, admittedly, the sole nominee of the insured in the said policy. The insured, however, died a pre-mature death on 4.10.1996. The respondent filed her claim with the appellant for payment of double of the assured sum with bonus and other benefits under the said policy. But the appellant made payment of Rs. 8,425/- on account of aggregate amount of premium paid towards the policy and Rs. 1,854/- on account of interest for delayed payment. These amounts are stated to have been received by the respondent "under protest". She asserted her right to get double of the assured sum with bonus and other benefits under the policy in question through her complaint filed before the District Forum No. 2, Jaipur. The appellant contested the complaint on the ground that since the deceased insured was not a Govt. servant and hence not liable to be insured under the provisions of the Rules 1953, he and after his death his nominee, were not entitled to the beneficial provisions of the said rules. The District Forum negatived the version of the appellant and decreed respondent''s claim vide its order dated 27.6.1996. Hence this appeal under Section 15 of the C.P. Act, 1986 (the "Act") by the appellant.
IT was vehemently urged by Mr. M.L. Vyas, the learned Counsel for the appellant that late Capt. Shri Kirpal Singh was simply an employee of the school which was a society registered under the provisions of Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958 and as such he was not liable to be insured under Rules, 1953 and hence not entitled to any benefits under the said rules. The learned Counsel added that the acts of the appellant''s insuring him and issuing an Endowments Insurance Policy to him under the provisions of Rules, 1953 and also receiving periodically the amounts of premium payable towards such policy, which acts were done de hors the rules, would not confer the status of a Govt. servant upon the deceased insured so as to Make him entitled to seek benefits under Rules, 1953. IT was submitted that there can be no estoppel against a Statute and, therefore, the doctrine of ''Promissory Estoppel'' was inapplicable to the facts of the present case. Reliance in support of such arguments was placed on : (1) AIR 2001 SC 330 (Para 22), M/s. Sharma Transport v. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh. Promissory Estoppel - Does not apply against Statute. (2) III (1998) SLT 383=AIR 1998 SC 1400, Tarsem Singh v. Sukhvinder Singh. Restitution of advantage under void agreement. (3) AIR 1995 SC 227, Smt. Ravinder Sharma v. State of Punjab & Ors. Appointment against Rules - No estoppel. (4) AIR 1992 (I) SC 1075, Amrit Banaspati Co. Ltd. v. State of Punjab & Ors. Promise to refund Sales Tax is unconstitutional and against public policy. Not enforceable at Court. No estoppel. (5) III (1999) SLT 306=AIR 1999 SC 1347, Amrit Banaspati Co. Ltd. v. State of Punjab & Ors. Amrit Banaspati Co. Ltd. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
Acceptance of initial deposit towards consideration cannot protect illegal allotment by applying principles of estoppel. (6) I (2000) CPJ 60 (NC)= 2000 NCJ (NC) 154, Rajasthan Housing Board v. Kailash Babu Sharma. Double allotment by mistake does not give any enforceable right. (7) Sagarmal Dulama v. Asstt. Director, S.I. Rev. No. 72 of 1994 decided on 13.1.1995 by Hon''ble National Commission. Forum cannot declare any rule or order illegal. Mr. Avinash Jain, the learned Counsel for the respondent, however, submitted that the material available on the record of the District Forum, clearly and fully proved that the late insured was and had always been treated by the appellant itself as a Govt. servant not only for the purposes of the Rules, 1953 but also for the purposes of all other service matters like pay, allowances, penalties and punishments. The learned Counsel, heavily relied upon the decisions in the cases of : (1) AIR 1984 SC 363, B.S. Minhas v. Indian Staticial Institute & Ors. Institute registered under Societies Act and fully controlled by Govt. It is an "Authority" within the meaning of Article 12 of Constitution. (2) AIR 1981 SC 487, Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi & Ors. Eng. College sponsored and controlled by Govt. is an "Authority" within the meaning of Article 12 of Constitution.
We gave our thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced before us and on a careful study of the material on the record of the District Forum, the facts and circumstances of the case and the law appliable thereto, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.
IN order to resolve the controversy between the parties over the true character of the insured as a Govt. servant or not it is necessary to take note of the following facts, which are not only fully established on record but also were not challenged before us. With a view to encourage, promote and develop the study of the aeronautics in all its branches and to provide one or more centres in the State of Rajasthan for the diffusion of useful knowledge and for furnishing advice on all matters pertaining to aeronautics and thus to promote air-mindedness and arrange for efficient and cheap air transport and to carry on and fulfil other like objects a society to be called "Rajasthan State Flying School" was formed on January 5, 1991 by the following persons, namely : 1.Sri Bhairon Singh Shekhawat,Chief Minister,Govt. of Rajasthan. Chairman 2.Sri Digvijay Singh, Home Minister, Govt. of Rajasthan. Vice Chairman 3.Sri V.B.L. Mathur, Chief Secretary,Govt. of Rajasthan. Member 4.Sri K.S. Rastogi, Finance Commissioner, Govt. of Rajasthan. Member 5.Sri Ram Lubhaya, Secy. Special Secretary, Civil Aviation Deptt.,Govt. of Rajasthan. Member 6.Sri R.K. Khanna Wing Commandar (Retd.),Chief Pilot Officer,Sanganer Airport, Jaipur, and Member 7.Air Commodore Sri G.K. Garud Dy. Director General N.C.C.,Rajasthan, Jaipur. Member
THE Memorandum of Association of this Society, besides setting out its various aims and objects, provided for the creation of Governing Counsel of the followings, viz. 1.Chief Minister, Govt. of Rajasthan. President 2.Home Minister, Govt. of Rajasthan. Vice President 3.Chief Secretary, Govt. of Rajasthan. Member 4.Finance Commissioner and Secretary to Govt. of Rajasthan. Member 5.Dy. Director General, N.C.C., Rajasthan. Member 6.Nominee of D.G., C.A., New Delhi Member 7.Three non-official Members, Having interest in flying and requisite experience to be co-opted. Member 8.Special Secretary to Govt., General Administration Deptt. and Civil Aviation Deptt., Govt. of Rajasthan. Member Secy 9.Special Secretary to Govt., Sanganer Airport, Jaipur, Rajasthan. Member Funds, properties and management of the affairs of the School were entrusted to the above Governing Council. This Council was to carry on the management of the affairs of the school through an Executive Committee constituted according to the Rules and Regulations of the School. The funds and properties of the School were to be utilised only towards the promotion of the objects of the School as set out in the Memorandum of Association. The School could not have been dissolved without the specific consent of the Govt. of Rajasthan, which was interested in it, and the dissolution was to take effect in accordance with the provisions contained in Sections 13 and 14 of the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958. The Society (School) was got duly registered under the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958 on January 8, 1991.
THE Rules and Regulations of the Society, if any were framed by it, were not placed on the record of the Forum. However, what we gather from the study of the material on the record of the Forum is that on January 10, 1991 the Special Secretary to the Govt. of Rajasthan in the Civil Aviation Deptt. issued an order to the effect that the members of the staff, who were Government servants and already stood deputed to the school by the Government of Rajasthan and were working therein as such, would continue to work there on the same service conditions as were there for them as Government servants and that at an appropriate time they would be given option either to remain in the service of the School or to revert to their parent Deparment in the Government of Rajasthan.
ON June 17, 1991 the first ordinary meeting of the Governing Council of the School was held under the Chairmanship of its President Sri Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, the then Chief Minister, Government of Rajasthan and was attended to by all the other members of the Council. Ten Resolutions speaking of the active and effective Control of the Council over the management, administration, conduct of business and other affairs and policy matters of the School were adopted in this meeting. Besides opting Maharaj Jai Singh, the Ex-Ruler of the State of Jaipur, as a Non-official member and making request afresh to Air Vice Marshal (Retd.) Sri Chandan Singh to be another Co-opted member, Controller of Aerodrome, Jaipur and Chief Flying Instructor, Rajasthan State Flying School, Jaipur, were nominated as members to the Governing Council. By Resolution No. 5 the appointment of the late Capt. Kirpal Singh, the deceased, insured, and the terms and conditions of his service, were approved by the Council and it was also resolved that approval for S.T.A. granted to the deceased insured be got from the Director General, Civil Aviation Deptt., Govt. of India, New Delhi. By Resolution No. 8 it was resolved that upto the time the service rules for the members of the Staff of the School were framed, the following Service Rules, governing the service conditions of the regular employees of the State Govt., shall govern their service conditions, namely,- (1) G.F. and A.R. with this modification that the Governing Council of the School; would be the Compe-tent Authority to take decisions in the financial matters pertaining to the School. (2) Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951. (3) Classification Control and Appeal Rules, 1958. (4) Rajasthan (Employees) Travelling Allowance Rules. (5) Rajasthan (Employees) Medical Expenses Reimbursement Rules.
Letter dated 12.11.1999, addressed by the Member Secretary of the Council to the Dy. Director of the appellant, says that prior to 10.1.1991 the School was being controlled and managed directly by the Civil Aviation Deptt. of the Govt. of Rajasthan but after that date such control and management was handed over to the Registered Society. Material on the record of the Forum further shows that all along deductions towards premium payable on the policy of the deceased insured were regularly made with periodical increase, from the monthly salary paid to him until his death.
The above facts, we are of the opinion, fully establish that the School was being earlier run by the Civil Aviation Deptt. of the Govt. of Rajasthan, that w.e.f. 5.1.1991 it was turned into a registered society for the objects and purposes set out above, that the control and management of the School was handed over to the Governing Council, that such Council comprised of the topmen of the Politcial Executive and the top Government servants of the Govt. of the day, that exclusive control and management of the School was exercised by the State Govt. through the said Governing Council, that all the funds and properties belonging to the erstwhile school and which funds and properties belonged to the State Govt., were transferred to the newly formed Registered Society, that all the financial assistances to the Society were given exclusively by the State Government, that the Government servants who were earlier working in the School, were transferred to the Registered Society with an option to either revert to their parent department or get themselves absorbed in the services of the Registered Society according to the Service Rules of the Society which were to be framed in due course, that new appointments in the School, including that of the deceased insured, were made by the aforementioned Governing Council and the Services Rules applicable to the regular Government servants working in the School, were made applicable to the newly appointed personnel. The above facts are to be read in the context that the earlier School, being run by the Civil Aviation Deptt. of the State Government, was discharging an important public function and the discharge of that important function with greater smoothness, responsibility, attention and dedication was transferred by the State Govt. to the newly formed Registered Society which was fully and exclusively controlled, managed and financed by the State Govt. itself. Not only the ownership of this Society vested in the State Govt. but also its control and management of its affairs, including financial matters, was exclusively exercised by the Governing Council. For all practical purposes the Registered Society is a State Agency or instrumentality. These findings, in our opinion fully attract the ratio decidendi of Supreme Court''s decisions in the cases of Sukhdev v. Bhagat Ram, AIR 1975 SC 1331, and R.D. Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, AIR 1979 SC 1628.
IN view of the above legal and factual position in this case, the cases cited by Mr. Vyas are found totally besides the point before us. No question of applicability or non-applicability of the doctrine of estoppel is involved herein. The Registered Society, in its capacity as an agency or instrumentality of the State Government, had not only appointed the deceased insured as Chief Pilot INstructor of the School but had also, applied all the relevant Service Rules, applicable to other Government servants, to him. The policy, was issued to him in accordance with the provisions of Rules, 1958 and periodical deductions of premium were legally made from his salary. The facts clearly attract the principles of law enunciated in the cases cited by the learned Counsel for the respondent. It was not disputed before us that in term of Rule 54 r/w Rule 40 of the Rules, 1953 the respondent was entitled to the relief awarded by the District Forum to her. In not making timely payment of double the sum assured of the assurance policy the appellant had rendered deficient services to her. The impugned order, therefore, calls for no interference by us.
IN the result, this appeal fails and is dismissed with cost on parties. The appellant is directed to make payment of the balance amount, payable to the respondent in terms of impugned order, within a period of next one month failing which such balance amount shall carry interest @ 12% p.a. from the date two months after the date of filing the claim by the respondent. Appeal dismissed.