Judgment :- 1. The question for consideration is whether the Central Government, while sanctioning the Regulations made by the Coconut Development Board under sub-section (1) of S.20 of the Coconut Development Board Act 1979, has the power to modify the regulations. The question arises out of the facts stated in the next paragraph. 2. The petitioner is employed as Sub Editor under the Coconut Development Board-hereinafter referred to as "the Board" - since 1979 or thereabout. On 5-1-1983 the Board constituted a Hindi Cell in its establishment for the purpose of implementing various schemes to propagate Hindi language in connection with the coconut development. The petitioner is a graduate in Hindi, and holds a Master's degree in Hindi with Diploma in Journalism of a Post-graduate Diploma in Hindi Translation from Dakshina Bharatha Hindi Prachara Sabha, Cochin. The respondent No. 4 is officiating as Sub Editor (Hindi) from 13-2-1993. This post, created in Patna, was transferred to Cochin on 14-2-1989. The promotion to the post of Hindi Officer is from the category of Sub Editors. The Respondent No. 4 who is officiating in the position of Sub Editor (Hindi) filed O.P.6772/92 challenging the promotion of the petitioner on ad-hoc basis to the post of Hindi Officer. In that Original Petition the Board was directed to take final decision on the question whether the "feeder category for promotion to Hindi Officer was restricted to Sub Editor (Hindi) or not". The Board did decide as directed by this court and made Regulations known as Coconut Development Board (Hindi Officer) Recruitment Regulations 1993. Under the Regulations the method of recruitment is "promotion, failing which by transfer on deputation and failing both by direct recruitment". In the case of appointment by promotion the qualifying feeder category prescribed was that the candidate must hold the office of "Sub Editor". The Regulations were submitted to the Central Government for its sanction under sub-section (1) of S.20 of the Act. The Central Government sanctioned and published the Regulations by the Notification No. GSR 706 dated 12th November 1993 (Ext. P9 to the petition). But it introduced the bracketed word (Hindi) after "Sub Editor". By reason of this modification "Sub Editors (Hindi)", alone qualified for promotion. The Sub Editors possessing the prescribed educational qualifications and experience were eliminated from the feeder category. The petitioner is one of them. 3. P9 to the petition). But it introduced the bracketed word (Hindi) after "Sub Editor". By reason of this modification "Sub Editors (Hindi)", alone qualified for promotion. The Sub Editors possessing the prescribed educational qualifications and experience were eliminated from the feeder category. The petitioner is one of them. 3. The petitioner contends that the authority to make regulations belongs to the Board, although the regulations have to be made with the previous sanction of the Central Government. He urges that the Central Government has no authority to modify oral to them. 4. The Board is a body corporate (sub-section (2) of S.4 of the act). The Board is empowered to appoint its employees and prescribe, by Regulations made under the Act, the method of appointment, conditions of service and the scales of pay and allowances of its officers and employees (sub-section (6) of S.7 of the act ). The Board is empowered "to make regulations not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder", to provide for all matters in which provision is necessary or expedient for the purpose of giving effect to this Act (sub-section (1) of S.20 of the act). 5. Analysis of the above provisions shows that the Board has the authority to prescribe not only the conditions of service and scales of pay and allowances of the employees but also the "method of appointment" which includes - prescription of qualifications, tests, interview and the final selection. The Board is enjoined to provide the method of appointment "by regulations made under this Act". It is, therefore, the Board which has to "make" regulations under the Act and prescribe "the method of appointment, the conditions of service and scale of pay and allowances" of its officers and employees. The Board consists of a Chairman appointed by the Central Government, officers of the status of Director of Central Plantation Crops Research Institute, Chairman of the Coir Board, three members of Parliament, representatives of the State Governments and so on. It is thus clear that the Legislature intended that the Board composed of such men of ability, experience and expertise shall exercise the authority of making regulations prescribing, inter alia, "'the method of appointment". It is reasonable to hold that the Board, prescribes its regulations, having regard to the efficient performance by its establishments and the promotion of the object of the Act. It is reasonable to hold that the Board, prescribes its regulations, having regard to the efficient performance by its establishments and the promotion of the object of the Act. When the Board prescribed "Sub Editor" as the, qualify ing category, it should be assumed that the Board was aware of the need to select efficient officers from amongst the Sub Editors. The Board, aware that there is on its establishment, an officer designated as Sub Editor (Hindi), chose to provide a broad based method of appointment by prescribing the feeder category of "Sub Editors" and did not limit the feeder category to "Sub Editor (Hindi)". 6. The Board made the regulations and submitted them to the Central Government for its "previous sanction" as required by sub-section (1) of S.20 of the Act. The words "with the previous sanction of the Central Government" do not by themselves suggest an authority in the Central Government to so modify the regulations sent to it for sanction as to alter them substantially. The Central Government has, by this modification taken to itself the power not only to sanction the regulations but to modify and amend the regulations sent to it for sanction. The language of sub-section (1) of S.20 which requires the Government to sanction the regulations, is significant. The power to accord sanction has not been enlarged by use of the words such as "with such modifications as it may deem fit". There is total absence of any words which suggest the power to modify or alter the regulations. The creation of power or its curtailment cannot be inferred or implied. Mere implication or expediency of a situation cannot confer power. The words "with the previous sanction of the Central Government" are not enough to read in them a power to amend, modify or alter the regulations sent for sanction. Words conferring such power are necessary. The modification made by the Central Government is of substance and not of form. It has limited the selection to the persons holding the office of Sub Editor (Hindi) and has eliminated all "Sub Editors" who may possess the prescribed educational qualifications. 7. It was urged that the above construction would mean that the Central Government is merely required to accord its mechanical sanction to whatever the Board proposes. The submission ignores that the Central Government has also the power to refuse to sanction the regulations. 7. It was urged that the above construction would mean that the Central Government is merely required to accord its mechanical sanction to whatever the Board proposes. The submission ignores that the Central Government has also the power to refuse to sanction the regulations. It is, therefore, not right that the construction placed by me on sub-section (1) of S.20 reduces the Central Governments power to a mechanical exercise of sanctioning the regulations prepared by the Board. This argument also does not explain the absence of the words such as "subject to such modifications as Central Government may think fit". 8. In my opinion the Central Government by modifying/ altering the Regulations, acted in excess of its authority, created by the words "with the previous sanction of the Central Government". The insertion of the bracketed word "Hindi" after the word "Sub Editor" in column 12 of the Schedule to the, Regulations is therefore, void. 9. I therefore allow the petition and make the following order: (i) The Notification No. GSR 706(E) dated 12th November 1993 (Ext. P9 to the petition) is valid. But the insertion of the word (Hindi) after the word "Sub Editor" in column No. 12 under the Caption "(1) promotion" is void. (ii) The feeder category for promotion to the post of Hindi Officer shall be read as "Sub Editor" and not "Sub Editor (Hindi)".