dr justice retired hurt - urc

retd personal


This is my cut and paste job from the verdict delivered by Justice Dr Arijit Prasayat J on 28 Apr 2009 ( & Retired on 10/05/2009) Civil Appeal No 3495 of 2005 decided on 28 Apr 2009--
8. In the case of Aslam's case (supra) a Bench of this court proceeded on incorrect factual premises inasmuch as after noticing that the URCs are not funded from the Consolidated Fund of India, it went wrong in concluding that the URCs are funded by CSD as well as the articles were supplied by the CSD. Unfortunately, it did not notice that no such funding is made by the CSD. Further, only refundable loans can be granted by the CSD to URCs at the rate of interest laid down by it from time to time upon the application of URCs seeking financial assistance. URCs can also take from other NonPublic Funds. Further observation regarding supply is also not correct. URCs, in fact, purchase articles from CSD depots and it is not an automatic supply and relation between URCs and CSDs is that of buyer and seller and not of principal and the agent. This Court further went wrong in holding that URCs are parts of CSDs when it has been clearly stated that URCs are purely private ventures and their employees are by no stretch of imagination employees of the Government or CSD. Additionally, in Aslam's case (supra) reference was made to Chandra Raha and Ors. V. Life Insurance Corporation of India (1995 Supp (2) SCC 611). The Bench hearing the matter unfortunately did not notice that there was no statutory obligation on the part of the Central Government to provide canteen services to its employees. The profits generated from the URCs are not credited to the Consolidated Funds, but are distributed to the Non Public Funds which are used by the units for the welfare of the troops. As per para 1454 of the Regulations for the Air Force, 1964 the losses incurred by the non public funds are not to be borne by the State.
What I am trying to highlight that as per same judge "there was no statutory obligation on the part of the govt to provide canteen services to its employees" . Does this mean that govt of India through Min of Defence through CSD is spending crores of funds from the consolidated funds of India to create crores of private funds for misuse in the name of welfare to the troops which is solely a govt of India concern?

After reading Article 12 of the Constitution of India, somehow I am not able to convince myself that URCs are not part of State and State has no "control" over URCs. The word "control" means as meant in Article 12 of the Constitution of India.


For the sake of discussion if we agree that URCs are not part of State but are private ventures, then following questions arise:

what is the extent of role of State in control of URCs? Is it equal to that for private ventures?

what is the source and destination of funds of URCs?




Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


  Search Forum


  LAWyersclubindia Menu

Indian Evidence Act     |    x