In be sued in tort or in contract,

In this respect, the present set up of the Govern­ment is analogous of the position of the East India Company which functioned not only as a Government with the sovereign powers as a delegate of the British Government but also carried on trade and commerce, as also public transport like Railway, Post and Telegraph and Road transport business. The State is liable for the damages occasioned by the negligence of the servants in service of the Government if the negligence is such as would render an ordinary employer liable. The State is as much liable for tort in respect of a tortuous act committed by its servants within the scope of his employment and functioning as such as any other employer. The immunity of the Crown in the United Kingdom was based on the old feudalistic no­tions of justice, namely, that the King was incapable of doing a wrong, and, therefore, of authorising or instigating one and that he could not be sued in his own Courts. In India, ever since the time of the East India Company, the sovereign has been held liable to be sued in tort or in contract, and the Common Law immunity never operated a Republican form of Government and one of the objectives to establish a socialistic State with its varied industrial and other ac­tivities employing a large army of servants, therefore, no justification in principle or in public interest, that the State should not be held li­able vicariously for the tortuous act of its servants.

x

Hi!
I'm Mary!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out