C.V. RAMAN, ETC. versus MANAGEMENT OF BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER, ETC.

Citation: [1988] 3 S.C.R. 662 · Decided: 21-04-1988 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: E.S. VENKATARAMIAH

cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
C.V. RAMAN, ETC. 
v. 
MANAGEMENT OF BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTIIER, ETC. 
APRIL 21, 1988 
[E.S. VENKATARAMIAH AND N.D. OIBA, JJ.] 
Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishment Act, 1947-Andhra Pradesh 
Shops and Establishments Act, 1966-Kerala Shops and Commercial 
Establishments Act, 196()-Whether nationalised banks and State Bank 
of India are establishments under Central Government within the mean-
ing of-Whether provisions of the Acts are not applicable to these Banks 
in view of exemption contained therein. 
These appeals ralsed an identical question. Civil Appeals 
Nos 4291 and 4292 of 1984 were preferred against the judgment of the 
Madras High Court in Writ Appeals Nos. 561 and 562 of 1983. The 
D 
appellant in these two appeals, an employee in the Bank of India, which 
is a Nationalised Bank, was dismissed. Aggrieved, he preferred an 
appeal under section 41(2) of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments 
Act, 1947 (the Tamil Nadu Shops Act). A preliminary objection was 
raised by the Bank to the effect that the Tamil Nadu Shops Act was not 
applicable to the Balllk in view of the exemption contained in Section 
~ 
E 
4(1)(c) thereof. The Appellate Authority held that the preliminary objec-
tion might be decided along with the appeal. The bank thereupon filed 
two writ petitions in lbe High Court, one for a d.irection to the Appellate 
.,,!I 
Authority to dispose of the preliminary objection before disposing of the 
appeal on merits, and the other, for a direction to the Apellate Autho-
rity not to proceed with the appeal. Both the Writ Petitions were 
~ 
F 
allowed by a Single Judge of the High Court on the ground that the 
· . 
Bank was an establi~hment under the Central Government and conse-
quently the provisio11s of the Tamil Nad11 Shops Act were not applicable 
to it in view of the exemptio11 contained in this behalf in section 4(1)(c). 
Against that decision, two writ appeals afore-mentioned were tiled, 
which were dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court by the 
G 
Judgment under appeal in these two appeals. The same judgment of the 
High Court had disposed of Writ Petition No. 1550 of 1981 also, which 
had arisen out of an application under section 51 of the Tamil Nadu 
)-. 
Shops Act made by the employees of the State Bank of India before the 
Commissioner of Labour for a direction that all the provisions of that 
Act would apply to them, being employed in the State Bank. The State 
H 
Bank had contended that it was an establishment under the Central 
662 
f 
C.V. RAMAN v. MANAGEMENT OF BANK OF INDIA 
663 
_}-
Government within the meaning of Section 4(1)(c) of the Tamil Nadu 
Shops Act and consequently the provisions of that Act were not appli· 
A 
cable to it. The Commissioner of labour had rejected the plea of the 
State Bank and held that the provisions of the Act were applicable to it. 
Civil Appeal No. 4329 of 1984 was preferred against the said Judgment 
by the State Bank's Staff Union and Civil Appeal No. 4735 of 1984 was 
preferred by the employees concerned. 
B 
f-
Civil Appeal No. 1120 of 1976 was preferred by Syndicate Bank, a 
Nationalised Bank, against the judgment of the Andbra Pradesh High 
-
Court (Division Bench), dismissing the Writ Appeal No. 268of1975 and 
y upholding the order of a Single Judge dismissing the Writ Petition 
No. 5973 of 1973 filed by the appellant Syndicate -Baiik. The services of 
~-
Respondent No. 3 in the appeal bad been terminated by the appellant c 
Syndicate Bank. An appeal was preferred by the said respondent before 
the Labour officer under the Andhra Pradesh Shops and Establishment 
Act, 1966 (the Andbra Pradesh Shops Act). The Labour officer allowed 
the _appeal which was conf"mned in a second appeal by the Labour 
Court. Aggrieved by these orders, the Bank f"lled the Writ Petition D 
above-said. It was urged by the appellant Bank that it being an estab-
lisbment 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 not applicable to it in view of the 
}-
exemption contained in this behalf. Civil Appeal No. 1042 was prefer· 
red by the Syndicate Bank against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh E 
High Court, dismissing the Writ Petition No. 86 of 1979. Respondent 
No. 3 in the appeal had been dismissed by the appellant bank. He prefer-
red an appeal which was allowed. The Bank preferred a second appeal 
before the Labour Court, which was

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.