K V KAMATH Vs. LABOUR ENFORCEMENT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The hearing stems from an application filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the proceeding being Case No.C-3006 of 2002 under Section 10(1) (a) of the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 read with Rule 6 of the Equal Remuneration Rules, 1976 and for setting aside the orders dated 04.06.2003 to 05.04.2004 passed therein, pending in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court, Calcutta.

(2.) The circumstances leading to the above application are that O. P. No.1 lodged a complaint under Section 10(1)(a) of the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 read with Rule 6 of the said Rules inter alia alleging that the accused persons failed to maintain register in Form 'D' at their work-spot at 19, Synagogue Street, City Centre, Calcutta - 700 001 in violation of the provisions of Section 10(1 )(a) of the said Act read with Rule 6 which is not at all correct. The concerned Branch Manager who was the head of the Branch and has control over the affairs of the establishment in his letter dated 20.06.2002 mentioned the said fact of maintenance of register in Form 'D' at all times in reply to the inspection report dated 06.06.2002. In terms of the banking practice each branch is being treated as separate entity and the concerned Branch Manager and/or in-charge of the respective branch is entrusted with the day to day affairs of such branch and is being treated as an employer as defined in Section 2(c) of the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976, and as such the petitioner has unnecessarily been implicated in the case. There is no actus reus nor mens rea in so far as the petitioner is concerned who cannot also be held vicariously liable. Accordingly, the initiation of instant proceeding and its continuation and the orders dated 04.06.2003 to 05.04.2004 and subsequent orders are liable to be quashed.

(3.) As none appeared for O. P. No. 1, the matter was heard ex parte.