JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.-By the impugned judgment, the Gujarat High Court held that notwithstanding enactment of the Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 (for short the Act ) the obligation to comply with the requirement of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948 (for short the Establishments Act ) did not get wiped out.

2. Though the fine that was imposed on the appellant is not very much in terms of money, the appellant contended that the problem is of recurring nature and, therefore, the issues should be settled. It was contended that there was divergence in views of several High Courts. The Patna High Court in Bihar State Road Transport Corporation v. Orang Bahadur (AIR 1968 Patna page 200) and Amamathsingh v. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal Bihar (AIR 1970 Patna page 269 (Full Bench) held that the enactment of Act did away with the requirement to comply with requirements of Establishment Act by applying logic of implied repeal. The Bombay High Court also held likewise in the Corporation of the City of Nagpur through Shop Inspector v. M/s. Inland Carriers, Nagpur and Anr. (1987 LLJ 270). But a different view was adopted by the Gujarat High Court in the impugned jud