K SINGARAM Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in the writ petition was working as an Inspector, Grade-I in the first respondent Company. Charges were framed against him and he was dismissed from service on 6th June, 1980. He filed an appeal to the General Manager of the Company on 18th August, 1980 which was rejected by order dated 28th January, 1981. THEreafter he filed an appeal under Section41(2) of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishment Act before the second respondent.One of the objections raised by the first respondent was that the first respondent was exempted from the provisions of the Shops and Establishments Act by virtue of Section 4(1)(c) of the Act. That objection was overruled by the second respondent as he placed reliance on a decision of Kerala Full Bench in Canara Bank v. Appellate Authority 1981 (2) LLJ 189. THE second respondent also went into the merits and gave findings against the writ petitioner. Consequently, the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed by the second respondent.

(2.) IN this writ petition, the order of the second respondent is challenged by the petitioner on merits. Recently, the Supreme Court considered an appeal against the judgment of the Kerala Full Bench along with other matters. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court holding that a nationalised Bank is an 'establishment' within the meaning covered by Section 4(1)(c) of the Act and, therefore, it is exempted from the provision of the Act. The reasoning of the Supreme Court in C. V. Raman, Etc. Etc. v. Bank of INdia, Etc. Etc. 1988 (3) SCR 662, 1988 AIR(SC) 1369, 1988 (3) SCC 105, 1988 (2) JT 167, 1988 (1) Scale 800, 1988 (2) UJ 10, 1988 (2) SLR 758, 1989 LIC 254, 1988 (57) FLR 219, 1988 BankJ 481, 1988 (2) BankJCLR 67, 1988 (2) LLJ 423, 1988 (2) LLN 156, 1988 (73) FJR 109, 1988 (64) CC 358, 1988 SCC(L&S) 687, 1988 (1) KLT 759, 1988 SCC(L&S) 687, 1988 SCC(L&S) 687, 1988 SCC(L&S) 687, 1988 SCC(L&S) 687, 1988 SCC(L&S) 687, 1988 SCC(L&S) 687, 1988 SCC(L&S) 687 will apply with equal force to nationalised INsurance companies and they will also be establishment under the Central Government within the purview of Section 4(1)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act. Hence, the appeal filed by the writ petitioner before the second respondent was unsustainable as he was not entitled to invoke the provisions of the Act as against the first respondent herein. Consequently, the appeal preferred by him before the second respondent should have been dismissed on that ground itself. It follows that the writ petition is not maintainable as the appeal preferred by the petitioner before the second respondent was itself not maintainable.