 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
 |
 |
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
 |
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Report No. 190 (iv) Power to make rules 8.6.7.10 The authority has been empowered under S. 64 UB to make regulations in respect of functions to be performed by the TAC, terms of the office of its members, procedure for election & other matters relating to the transaction of its business. 8.6.7.11 Clause (b) of sub-section (2) may be amended so as to give effect to 'nomination' in place of election of its members. 8.6.7.12 Sub-section (3) empowers TAC to make regulations in respect of Regional Committees. As the Regional Committees are not functioning anymore, the provisions of this sub-section maybe deleted. 8.6.7.13 Again, the provisions of sub-section (4) need omission as they are transitional in nature and have become redundant long back. 8.6.8 Need for repeal of certain provisions relating to TAC in part IIB of the principal Act 8.6.8.1 Some of the provisions in part IIB of the principal Act are required to be repealed as being transitional in nature which are as follows: (a) The provisions of S. 64 UD, except proviso to sub-section (1) (inserted by Act of 1999), being transitional in nature need to be repealed as they have become redundant long back. (b) Proviso to sub-section (1) may also be repealed because its provisions have been taken care of under clause (a) of Section 64 UA (1). (c) The provisions of S. 64 UF providing for assets and liabilities of General Insurance Council to vest in the Advisory Committee after the commencement of the Amendment Act, 1968 need to be repealed as the assets and liabilities have already been vested in TAC. (d) The provisions of Section 64 UG also need to be repealed because its provisions have become irrelevant as all the contracts/ agreements made by the Tariff Committee before 1968 are dealt by the Advisory committee as also the suits or legal proceedings filed by or against Tariff committee after 1968 Amendment are being dealt by TAC . It is obvious that after a period of more than 3 decades, these provisions do not have any relevance. (e) Similarly, provisions of Section 64UH protecting the interest of the employees of Tariff Committee who were in employment before the Amendment Act 1968 need to be repealed because all those employees are now the employees of the Advisory Committee and others, who could not, should have availed the benefits mentioned under this section. (f) The provisions of Section 64 UI obligates every person, who is in possession or custody of the property of the Tariff Committee or is in possession of documents relating to such property, to deliver those to the Advisory Committee. Here also there' is every possibility that the transfer of such possession of property and documents have taken place. Hence, provisions have become redundant, therefore, to be repealed. Even if such delivery has not taken place, can it be claimed under the law after a period of more than 3 decades?    |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
|||||||||
Back