S. B. SINHA, C. J.

( 1 ) CONSTITUTIONALITY of sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 47 of the A. P. Shops and establishments Act, 1988 (for short "the Shops act") is in question in this writ petition. FACTS

( 2 ) THE petitioner-company, srinivasa resorts Limited , engaged in the business of managing and running hotels," is a company incorporated under the provisions of the companies Act, 1956. The petitioner has a hotel in the name and style of "itc Kakatiya sheraton" and is being run by ITC Hotels limited, another company incorporated under the Companies Act. The said hotel was also registered under the provisions of the Shops act.

( 3 ) THE 3rd respondent is the Union of employees and workers of the said hotel. It is alleged that the 2nd respondent at the instance of 3rd respondent union visited the hotel on may 31, 2001 and as required by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner furnished information regarding the employees who had left the service of the hotel during the last 2-3 years and the amounts paid to them towards full and final settlement of the dues. The petitioner by letter dated August 6, 2001 also furnished the receipts signed by the employees who had left the hotel in token of the amounts received by them. It may be noticed herein that lot of correspondence took place between the petitioner-company and the 2nd respondent on the issue and it is not necessary to refer to the same as the main challenge in the writ petition is as to the constitutional validity of the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 47 of the Shops Act. Suffice it to state that while the 2nd respondent was insisting upon the petitioner-company to furnish the final settlement statements of the employees who had left the service of the Hotel in order to know whether any service compensation has been paid to them or not in accordance with the provisions of the Shops Act, the case of the petitioner was that no further documents except those already produced were available with them. By reason of letter of the 2nd respondent dated August 7, 2001, the petitioner was also called upon to show-cause why penal action should not be taken under Section 63 of the Act for failure to furnish the required documents. STATUTORY PROVISIONS:

( 4 ) THE A. P. Shops and Establishments act (Act No. 15 of 1966) was enacted in the year 1966. Section 40 of Act, 1966 provided for conditions for terminating the service of an employee and payment of gratuity. The said provision was amended in the year 1976 by reason of Act No. 53 of 1976 and ultimately act, 1966 was repealed by the present Act, 1988. Section 47 of Act, 1988 provides for conditions for terminating the services of an employee, payment of service compensation for termination, retirement, resignation etc. For convenience sake, the unamended Section 40 of Act, 1966, the amended Section as existed in 1976 as also Section 47 of Act, 1988 may be tabulated as under: "section 40 of A. P. Shops and establishments Act, 1966 prior to 1976 conditions for terminating the service of an employee and payment of gratuity : (1) No employer shall without a reasonable cause and except for misconduct, terminate the services of an employee and payment of gratuity. (2) No employer shall without a reasonable cause and except for misconduct terminate the services of an employee who has been in his employment continuously for a period of not less than six months without giving such employee, at least one month s notice in writing or wages in lieu thereof and gratuity amounting to fifteen days average wages for each year of continuous service. (3) An employee who has completed the age of sixty years or who is physically or mentally unfit having been declared by a medical certificate, or who wants to retire on medical grounds or to resign his services, may give up his employment after giving to his employer, notice of at least one month in the case of an employee of sixty years of age, and fifteen-days in any other case; and ever

Click Here to Read the rest of this document