Quashed

Riji G.Nair v. Assistant Labour Officer

Kerala HC6 Jun 2023Crl.MC/736/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings against the Managing Director of a State Cooperative Federation accused of maintaining wage registers under the Minimum Wages Act. Holding that he was a public servant, the court ruled that prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. was mandatory and extended the reasoning from a prior related judgment.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings in S.T. No. 724 of 2012 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court – III, Kottayam are quashed.

Riji G.Nair Vs Assistant Labour Officer — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1945

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 736 OF 2014

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ST 724/2012 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT – III, KOTTAYAM

¶7

PETITIONER/S/ACCUSED:

¶8

RIJI G.NAIR
"SREE SREE", NELLIMUKKU,
THIRUMULLAVARAM, KOLLAM-691 012.
BY ADVS.
SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN (SR.)
SMT.K.PUSHPAVATHI

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER
1ST CIRCLE, CIVIL STATION,
KOTTAYAM.
2STATE OF KERALA
REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM.
SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,SRI.RENJITH GEORGE

¶11

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

¶13

CRL.MC NO. 736 OF 2014

¶14

JUDGMENT Dated this the 6^th day of June, 2023

¶15

The petitioner was the Managing Director of Kerala

¶16

State Co-operative Consumers Federation Limited, a retail marketing initiative functioning under the ministry of co-operation, Government of Kerala. Prior to his appointment as Managing Director, the petitioner had worked serving as Assistant Executive Engineer in the Irrigation Department. The challenge in this Crl.M.C. is against criminal prosecution initiated against the petitioner in his capacity as Managing Director, based on Annexure A2 complaint filed under Section 22B of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The allegation in the complaint is regarding the failure to maintain wage register and issue wage slips which are offences punishable under Rule 29 (1) and (2) of the Kerala Minimum Wages Rules, 1948. The Magistrate having take cognizance of the offences and issued warrant against the petitioner, this Crl.M.C. is filed.

¶17

CRL.MC NO. 736 OF 2014

¶18

3

¶19

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted

¶20

that the criminal prosecution is initiated on the allegation. It is pointed out that based on the very same inspection, the prosecution was launched against the petitioner under the provisions of the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishment Act. Attention is brought to Annexure A4 judgment by which those complaints were quashed by this Court for reason of the prosecution having been initiated without obtaining sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. This Court also found that the show cause notice was issued to the petitioner in a wrong address and thereby denying the petitioner an opportunity to submit his explanation. Reference is made to the Minimum Wages Rules to submit that in the case at hand, show cause notice was issued in the wrong address.

¶21

I heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. 4. Having carefully read Annexure A4 judgment, I find the reasoning therein to be well founded and applicable to the instant case. The petitioner being a

¶22

CRL.MC NO. 736 OF 2014

¶23

4

¶24

public servant and an officer under the Government, sanction under 197 Cr.P.C. is a prerequisite, since the alleged offence was committed during the course of official duty. The failure to issue show cause notice to the correct address is also a material defect, since that had resulted in the petitioner being denied the opportunity to submit his explanation. Moreover, it is doubtful as to how the failure to maintain wage register and issue wage slips from the Chingavanam outlet can result in the petitioner being implicated.

¶25

For the above mentioned reasons, all further proceedings in S.T.No.724 of 2014 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court – III, Kottayam is quashed.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

V.G.ARUN
JUDGE

¶28

RK

¶29

CRL.MC NO. 736 OF 2014

¶30

5

¶31

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 736/2014

¶32

PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 : A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER
NO.GO(RT)NO.452/2006/CO-OP.
DTD.12.10.2006 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE A2A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT
DTD.28.3.2012 FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE III, KOTTAYAM.
ANNEXURE A3A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER SHEET IN ST
NO.724/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE JFCM-III,
KOTTAYAM.

¶33

CRL.MC NO. 736 OF 2014

¶34

¶35

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 736/2014

¶36

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶37

ANNEXURE A1 : COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT
ORDER NO.GO(RT)NO.452/2006/CO-OP.
DTD.12.10.2006 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE A2 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT
DTD.28.3.2012 FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE III, KOTTAYAM.
ANNEXURE A3 : COPY OF THE ORDER SHEET IN
ST NO.724/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE JFCM-
III, KOTTAYAM.

Riji G.Nair v. Assistant Labour Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Riji G.Nair v. Assistant Labour Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dheera N.G Vs Simesh S

Saji Thomas Vs the State of Kerala

Simeesh.S Vs Dheeran.G

Sreeja Vs State of Kerala

Shabeer.M Vs M/S Integranted Finance Co. Ltd.

Shahina Vs State of Kerala