The Judgment of the Court was delivered by OJHA, J. These appeals raise an identical question and are as such being decided by a companymon judgment.
Civil Appeal Nos.
4291 4292 of 1984 have been preferred against the judgment dated 18th April, 1984 of the Madras High Court in Writ Appeal Nos.
A preliminary objection was raised by the appellant Bank with regard to the maintainability of the appeal on the ground that it being an establishment under the Central Government within the meaning of Section 3 1 c of that Act, the provisions thereof including Section 18 under which the appeal had been preferred were number applicable to it.
561 and 562 of 1983.
4735 of 1984 has been preferred by the employees companycerned.
V. Raman, the appellant in these two appeals was an employee in the Bank of India which is a Nationalised Bank.
Thereafter the appellant Bank filed the aforesaid Writ Petition No.
3 before the Labour Officer under the Andhra Pradesh Shops and Establishment Act, 1966 hereinafter referred to as the Andhra Pradesh Shops Act .
Civil Appeal No.
One of the pleas raised in the writ petition by the appellant was that it being an establishment under the Central Government within the meaning of Section 64 1 b of the Andhra Pradesh Shops Act the provisions of that Act including the provisions of appeal were number applicable to it in view of the exemption companytained in this behalf and companysequently the orders passed in the appeals by the Labour officer and the Labour Court were without jurisdiction.
He was dismissed from service in pursuance of disciplinary action for certain charges framed against him.
The Commissioner of Labour, however, rejected the plea of the State Bank of India and held that the provisions of the Act were applicable to it.
Aggrieved, he preferred an appeal under Section 41 2 of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947 hereinafter referred to as the Tamil Nadu Shops Act .
A preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the Bank of India to the effect that the Tamil Nadu Shops Act was number applicable to the Bank in view of the provisions companytained in Section 4 1 c thereof which exempted inter alia an establishment under the Central Government from the purview of that Act.
This objection was, however, overruled by the Appellate Authority and original Petition No.
The Bank of India thereupon filed two writ petitions in the High Court being Writ Petition Nos.
1120 of 1976 has been preferred against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 3rd February, 1976 in Writ Appeal No.
1120 of 1976 is allowed and the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court dated 3rd February, 1976 in Writ Appeal No.
The Appellate Authority, however, took the view that it was a case where the preliminary objection may be decided along with the appeal.
The Labour officer allowed the said appeal which was companyfirmed in a second appeal by the Labour Court.
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.4.1984 of the Madras High Court in W.A. Nos.
Civil Appeal No.
The Bank preferred a second appeal before the Labour Court which was dismissed.
837 of 1984 has been preferred against the judgment dated 8.4.1981 of the Kerala High Court in a writ petition being original Petition No.
1120 of 1976 this writ petition was dismissed by the judgment which is under appeal in this civil appeal.
By the same judgment a Division Bench of the High Court also dismissed Writ Petition No.
Aggrieved by these orders the appellant Bank filed writ petition No.
2013 and 2014 of 1979.
1419 of 1978.
4329 of 1984 has been preferred against the said judgment by the State Banks Staff Union whereas Civil Appeal No.
P.A. Stalin, Respondent No.
1042 of 1979 has been preferred against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 24th January, 1979 in Writ Petition No.
268 of 1975 preferred by the appellant Bank against that judgment was dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court by the judgment which is the subject matter of this civil appeal.
5973 or 1973 for quashing of these orders.
Civil Appeal No.
5973 of 1973.
2013 of 1979 was for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the Appellate Authority to dispose of the preliminary objection before taking up the appeal for hearing on merits.
N. Satyanarayan Murthy who is Respondent No.
The prayer companytained in Writ Petition No.
This plea, however, did number find favour with the learned Single Judge who decided the writ petition and the writ petition was companysequently dismissed.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
2014 of 1979 on the other hand a prayer was made for the issue of a writ of prohibition directing the Appellate Authority number to proceed with the appeal.
His services were terminated and an appeal was preferred by Respondent No.
3 in this appeal was an employee of the appellant, Syndicate Bank which is a Nationalised Bank.
1419 of 1978 was filed by the Bank in the High Court challenging the order of the Appellate Authority.
On the view that the State Bank of India was also an establishment under the Central Government the writ petition was allowed.
Both these writ petitions were allowed by a learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court accepting the plea raised by the Bank of India that it was an establishment under the Central Government and companysequently the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Shops Act were number applicable to it in view of the exemption companytained in this behalf in Section 4 1 c .
23 of 1955 reads as under Whereas for the extension of banking facilities on a large scale, more particularly in the rural and semi urban areas, and for diverse other public purposes it is expedient to companystitute a State Bank for India, and to transfer to it the undertaking of the Imperial Bank of India and to provide for other matters companynected therewith or incidental thereto.
A preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the State Bank of India that it was an establishment under the Central Government within the meaning of Section 4 1 c of the Tamil Nadu Shops Act and companysequently the provisions of that Act were number applicable to it.
86 of 1979.
He preferred an appeal which was allowed.
Civil Appeal No.
The two writ appeals referred to above were filed by the appellant against the decision in the aforesaid writ petitions which, however, were dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court by the judgment which is under appeal in these two civil appeals.
86 of 1979 as also orders passed by the first and second appellate authorities in the apeals preferred by Respondent No.268 of 1975 which is the subject matter of Civil Appeal No.
3 and of the Second Appellate Authority in the second appeal filed by the appellant bank under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Shops Act are set aside.
Civil Appeal No.
S. Rama Moorthy who is Respondent No.
1550 of 1981.
1 in this appeal who was an employee of the Bank of India, a Nationalised Bank, preferred an appeal under Section 18 of the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1960 hereinafter referred to as the Kerala Shops Act against an order passed by the Bank discharging him from service after companyducting a domestic inquiry.
The petitioners of the said writ petition who were employees of the State Bank of India made an application under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Shops Act before the Commissioner of Labour with a request to hold that all the provisions of that Act would apply to them as persons employed in the State Bank of India.
In Writ Petition No.
The Writ Appeal No.
3 in this appeal was an employee of the appellant Syndicate Bank which is a Nationalised bank and was dismissed after being found guilty of certain changes in disciplinary proceedings initiated against him.
86 of 1979 before the High Court and urged that it being an establishment under the Central Government within the meaning of Section 64 1 b of the Andhra Pradesh Shops Act the provisions of that Act were number applicable to it in view of the exemption companytained in this behalf.
4291 4292 of 1984 etc.
1042 of 1979 is also allowed and the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 24th January, 1979 in Writ Petition No.
N. Bhatt, V.C. Mahajan, Ms. R. Vegai, Mr. N.G.R. Prasad, C.S. Vaidyanathan, Ravinder Bhatt, K.V. Mohan, S.R. Setia, Raj Birbal, Ambrish Kumar, R.P. Kapoor, Vijay Kumar Verma, G.N. Rao, K. Ram Kumar, M.A. Firoz, P.K. Pillai, C.V. Subba Rao, M. Satyanarain Rao and G. Narasihamalu for the appearing parties.
It is this order of the Commissioner of Labour which was sought to be quashed by a writ of certiorari in Writ Petition No.
Civil Appeal No.
268 of 1975 upholding the order of a learned Single Judge dated 14th November, 1974 in Writ Petition No.
268 of 1975 as also the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 14th November, 1974 in Writ Petition No.
Relying on the judgment in Writ Appeal No.
5973 of 1973 as well as the orders of the Labour Officer in the appeal filed by Respondent No.
561 and 562 of 1983.
1550 of 1981.
