ivil Appeal No 3177 of 1982
From the Judgment and Order dated 24  81 of the Orissa High Court in Original Jurisdiction Case No 233 of 1977
N K Das and A P Mohanty for the Appellant G L Sanghi R K Mehta Ms Mona Mehta and J R Das for the Respondents The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHARMA J
The question which arises in this appeal by special leave from the decision of the Orissa High Court in a writ case is whether the estate of Lord Jagannath has PG NO 734 vested in the State of Orissa as a result of the notification dated 1831974 issued under section 3 A of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act 1951 hereinafter referred to as the Act or the said notification is ultra vires and fit to be quashed
The writ petition in the High Court was filed by a number of persons claiming to be Sevaks and worshippers of Lord Jagannath the presiding deity of the famous Jagannath temple
The management of the temple and the properties including the intermediary interest is in the hands of a trust which was impleaded as a respondent in the case
Besides the State of Orissa and Collector Puri the Administrator Jagannath temple the Jagannath Committee were also made parties
They however do not support the writ petitioners and agree with the State that the estate has vested under the impugned notification
The Act was passed in 1952 for the purpose of abolishing all the rights in land of intermediaries between the raiyats and the State of Orissa by whatever name known and for vesting the same in the State
Section 3 authorises the State Government to declare by a notification any estate specified therein to have passed to and become vested in the State
The result of such a notification is dealt with in section 5
In substance the intermediary concerned is divested of the notified interests and becomes entitled to compensation to be computed in the manner indicated in the Act
By an amendment section 3 A was included in the Act permitting the State Government to issue a single notification in respect of a class or classes of intermediaries in the whole or a part of the State
By a further amendment in 1963 Chapter II A was inserted in the Act making special provisions for public trusts
Clause e of section 13 A described trust estate as an estate the whole of the net income whereof is dedicated exclusively to charitable or religious purposes
Admittedly the estate belonging to Lord Jagannath is included in the expression trust estate
Provisions were made in Chapter II A for entertaining claims and determining nature of the estates claimed to be trust estates and announcing the decision by notification
The effect of such a determination was as mentioned in section 13 I1 to save the estate from vesting under a notification issued under s 3 or 3 A 4
A notification under section 3 of the Act was issued in respect to the estate of Lord Jagannath on 2741963 and on the same date another notification under Chapter II A followed declaring the estate as trust estate
Consequently the deity was not divested of the estate
In 1970 Chapter PG NO 735 II A was repealed
In 1974 the Act was further amended and trust estate which was not included in the definition section of the original Act was defined in clause oo in the following terms excluding the Explanation which is not relevant for the present case 0oo trust estate  means an estate the whole of the net income whereof under any trust or other legal obligation has been dedicated exclusively to charitable or religious purposes of a public nature without any reservation of pecuniary benefit to any individual Provided that all estates belonging to the Temple of Lord Jagannath at Puri within the meaning of the Shri Jagannath Temple Act 1955 and all estates declared to the trust estates by a competent authority under this Act prior to the date of coming into force of the Orissa Estates Abolition Amendment Act 1970 shall be deemed to be trust estates
On 1831974 the impugned notification under section 3 A as quoted below was issued The 18th March 1974 SRO No 18474 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub section 1 of section 3 A of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act 195 l Orissa Act I of 1952 the State Government do hereby declare that i the intermediary interests of all intermediaries whose estates have been declared as trust estates under Chapter Il A of the said Act ii those in respect of which claims and references made under the said chapter were pending on the date of commencement of the Orissa Estates Abolition Amendment Act 1970 Orissa Act 33 of 1970 and iii the intermediary interests of all intermediaries in respect of all estates other than those which have already vested in the State have passed to and become vested in the State free from all encumbrances
PG NO 736 No 13699 EA I ND 174 R By order of the Governor SM Patnaik Commissioner cum Secretary to Government
 In this background the writ application was filed in the High Court challenging the notification
The High Court rejected the claim of the petitioner and dismissed the writ application by the impugned judgment
The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that as a result of the decision under Chapter II A declaring Lord Jagannath s estate a trust estate the same must be deemed to have been excluded from the scope of the Act and this result in the eye of law became final and cotinued to remain effective even after the repeal of Chapter II A Reliance was placed on Section 5 of the Orissa General Clauses Act and it was argued that the right which the petitioner acquired under Section 13 1 as a result of the decision cannot disappear on the repeal of this Chapter The learned counsel proceeded to urge that as a result of the said decision the estate in question went completely out of the ambit of the Act and for this reason when in 1974 the Act was further amended it was considered necessary to define trust estate in Section 2 of the Act and to expressly include Lord Jagannath s estate within the expression with a view to set at rest any controversy in this regard
According to the learned counsel the intention of the legislature is clearly to permanently spare the petitioner s estate from the of the Act In our view the argument has no merit and must be rejected
It is true that an order was passed under s 13 G declaring the petitioner s estate as a trust estate and further by the insertion of clause oo in s 2 the petitioner s estate continued to be a trust estate but the question is as to what is the legal effect flowing from such a declaration This aspect is dealt within s 13 I which is quoted as under omitting sub section 2 which is not relevant in the present context 13 1
Effect of orders passed under section 13 G I All estates declared under this Chapter to be trust estates by the Tribunal or the High Court as the case may be shall he deemed to have been excluded from the operation of the vesting notification and never to have vested in the State in pursuance thereof emphasis added PG NO 737 It is manifest from the language of the Section that it saves a  trust estate so declared under section 13 G from the operation of a notification issued under section 3 or 3 A but does not extend the benefit any further The provisions do not confer protection from the Act itself and cannot be interpreted to clothe it with a permanent immunity from being vested by a later notification issued under the Act Such an estate could be vested in the State of Orissa by a subsequent notification was made clear by clause b of s 13 K which reads as follows a 
b nothing in this Chapter shall be deemed to debar the State Government from vesting any trust estate by the issue of a notification under Section 3 Sections 7 A 8 A 8 D and X E of the Act include special provisions for a trust estate and unmistakably indicate that trust estates are within the purview of the Act The benefit they receive from a declaration under section 13 G is limited and referable only to a vesting notification issued earlier
There is thus no merit in the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that the petitioner s estate could not be vested in the State by a notification issued subsequently 7
We accordingly hold that there is no infirmity in the notification dated 1831974 issued under section 3 A of the Act The appeal fails and is dismissed but in the circumstances without costs


Summary:
The appellant Co operative Society has filed this appeal by special leave against the High Court s order passed in a writ petition filed by it whereby the High Court set aside the award of the Industrial Tribunal
The High Court in the impugned order held that the appellant is liable to pay to its employees bonus at the rate of 20 per cent of its total annual earnings for the years 1975 76 1976 77 and 1977 78
The appellant contends that the High Court went wrong in directing the appellant to pay bonus with regard to various amounts invested by it as permitted by the relevant provi sions of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act 1960 and the amounts carried forward to its reserve fund
According to the appellant the High Court neither read the provisions of Sec
6d of the Bonus Act 1965 correctly nor was it justified in relying on the Explanation to the 3rd Schedule to the Bonus Act
Dismissing the appeal subject to the modification indi cated in the judgment hereinbelow this Court HELD The expression capital is not defined under the Bonus Act
It must therefore be understood in the sense in which that expression is generally understood
That means all amounts which are classified as capital in contrast to revenue must qualify for deduction subject to the limit of 85 per cent provided such capital is invested by the Society in its establishment as evidenced by its books of accounts at the commencement of the accounting year
Any such capital upto 8S per cent is thus deductible
Further more all sums which have been carried forward in respect of the relevant accounting year to a reserve fund as required under any law applicable to Co operative Societies for the time being in force are also deductible from gross profits
269B D 267 Accordingly all such amounts held by the Society as reserve fund in terms of Sec 66 of the Co operative Socie ties Act must qualify for deduction
269H If larger amounts are carried forward to the reserve fund in terms of Sec 66 all such amounts will come within the ambit of item 4 of the 3rd Schedule to the Bonus Act and qualify for deduction
270A B