Question

U.P. Electricity Board v. Harishanker AIR 1979 SC, the court laid down essential
element
a) The subject of enumeration constitute a class or category

b) That class or category is not exhausted by the enumeration

c) both

d) none of the above​

Answer 1

The case is primarily concerned with the age of retirement of two obscure workmen but it raises questions of general importance concerning workmen employed by most statutory bodies and corporations.

Explanation: The two workmen were originally employed by Seth Ram Gopal and Partners who were licensees for the distribution of electricity under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910. There were certified Standing Orders for the industrial establishment of M/s Seth Ram Gopal and Partners. The certified Standing Orders did not prescribe any age of superannuation for the employees. That, according to the workmen, meant that they could continue to work as long as they were fit and able to discharge their duties. The electricity undertaking of M/s Seth Ram Gopal and Partners was purchased by the U.P State Electricity Board, with effect from December 15, 1964, under the provisions of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. The employees of Seth Ram Gopal and Partners became the employees of the U.P State Electricity Board. The U.P State Electricity Board, which it is no longer disputed is an industrial establishment to which the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, applies, neither made nor got certified any Standing Orders as it was bound so to do under that Act.

D , NONE OF THE ABOVE.