SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(Ker) 318

K.K.USHA, K.NARAYANA KURUP
Augustine Mathai – Appellant
Versus
Appellate Authority – Respondent


Judgment :-

K. Narayana Kurup, J.

The appellant claims that he was appointed as an Accountant under the second respondent Church and upon his being denied employment he moved the first respondent. Appellate Authority under S.18 of the Kerala Shops and Commercial Establishments Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act') against the alleged termination of his service According to him, the church is a" commercial establishment "as defined under S.2(4) of the Act and that his service was terminated without conducting any enquiry and without assigning any reason as enjoined under the Act and hence per se illegal. The 2nd respondent church contended inter-alia that it is neither a shop nor a commercial establishment as defined under the Act nor the provisions of the Act are not attracted to them and hence the appeal itself is not maintainable under the Act. The maintainability of the appeal was heard as a preliminary issue and the first respondent as per Ext. P1 order upheld the preliminary objection that the church is not an establishment as defined under the Act and in that view dismissed the appeal and Ext. P1 order was under challenge before this Court in O.P. 3272/1987 out of which this Writ Ap


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top