Judges : JAGANNADHA RAO,G.VISWANATHA IYER
Chittur Service Co-op.Bank Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
Case No : O.P.No. 8034 of 1985
Decided On : 10/25/1991
Advocates Appeared :
V. Chitambaresh For Petitioner Government Pleader (V, Bhaskara Menon), K.S. Madhusoodanan & A.X. Varghese For Respondents
Co-operative Society - Jurisdictional challenge under Kerala Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act, 1972 - S.2(a) of the Act - Interpretation of 'employee' - Managerial or administrative capacity - Exclusion from the definition of 'employee' - Relevant considerations for determining managerial position - Branch Manager's duties and responsibilities - Court's interpretation of duties as mainly managerial or administrative - Quashing of order for subsistence allowance
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Co-operative Society, challenged an order directing payment of subsistence allowance to the third respondent, a Branch Manager, under the Kerala Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act, 1972. The petitioner contended that the third respondent was not an 'employee' as defined in the Act, due to his managerial or administrative role.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the duties and responsibilities of the Branch Manager were mainly of a managerial or administrative nature, and therefore, he was not an 'employee' as defined in the Act. The court quashed the order for subsistence allowance and dismissed the third respondent's application under the Act.
Issues: Jurisdictional challenge regarding the definition of 'employee' under the Act, and the determination of the third respondent's role as mainly managerial or administrative.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the definition of 'employee' under S.2(a) of the Act and considered relevant considerations for determining a managerial position. It emphasized that the designation and ancillary duties were not conclusive, and the main features of the employment were crucial. The court analyzed the duties and responsibilities of the Branch Manager, concluding that they were mainly managerial or administrative.
Final Decision: The court allowed the original petition, quashed the order for subsistence allowance, and dismissed the third respondent's application under the Act.
Viswanatha Iyer, J.
The petitioner, which is a Co-operative Society registered under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, 1969, has filed this original petition challenging the order Ext. P5 of the second respondent, the District Labour Officer, Palghat, the competent authority under the Kerala Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act, 1972. Act 27 of 1973 (the act) directing payment to the third respondent of an amount of Rs.8,800/- as subsistence allowance under the said Act for the period 7-2-1984 to 31-1-1985.
2. The third respondent was borne in the category of Branch Manager, and was the manager of the branch of the petitioner Bank at Kacheri Medu. The Head Office of the petitioner is elsewhere in Chittoor. On the allegation that the third respondent and the Assistant Secretary of the petitioner Bank had defalcated money to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- the petitioner kept the third respondent under suspension by the resolution of its managing committee dated February, 2,1984, served on the third respondent on 6-2-1984. The third respondent was drawing a salary ofRs.1,022/- per month at that time. He applied for payment of subsistence allowance under the Act for the period from 7-2-1984 to 31-1-1985. The application was allowed and the petitioner was directed to pay the amount of Rs. 8.800/- by the proceedings Exts. P5 dated 24-7-1985. It is this award that is challenged in the original petition.
3. Petitioner's case is primarily a jurisdictional one, namely, that the third respondent was not an "employee" as defined in the Act, and therefore the very application under the Act was not maintainable, rendering the order Ext. P5, one without jurisdiction. This jurisdictional point had been specifically raised by the petitioner in its statement of objections Ext. P3 before the second respondent. But the latter chose to ignore this objection while passing the order Ext. P5.
4. Petitioner contends that the third respondent was not an "employee" as defined in the Act, for the reason that he was employed mainly in a managerial or administrative capacity in the Bank. The duties and responsibilities of the third respondent are laid down in the subsidiary rules for the branch at Kacheri Medu, a copy of which is marked Ext. P1. These rules deal with such matters as the location of the Branch, the business to be transacted, therein, the staff pattern and their pay, as also the duties and responsibilities of the officers. Inter alia, it is provided that the Branch Manager will be paid an additional supervision allowance of Rs.25/-. His duties and responsibilities are as under:
"The Manager shall subject to the Control of the President and the Secretary and to such instructions they may issue from time to time, have to the following duties and responsibilities:
1. The Branch Manager will be the person responsible for the proper maintenance of the Accounts Registers, Ledgers, and other records maintained by the Branch.
2. To be the person responsible for the safe custody of cash and other assets of the Branch.
3. To maintain or cause to maintain and keep in proper form all the accounts registers, ledgers and other records required to be maintained in a Bank under the provisions of the Act. Rules and Bye-laws.
4. To receive and disburse money on behalf of the Bank on proper vouchers and receipts.
5. To keep such cash balance in his charge in the branch as the Board of Directors may limit.
6. To receive, deposit and issue temporary receipt and to arrange for the issue of fixed deposit receipts daily signed by the Secretary, President and two of the Directors in lieu of the temporary receipts issued by him.
7. Sanction of gold loans subject to limit prescribed, passing of cheques etc.
8. Custody of cash, jewels and all other properties along with Cashier-cum-clerk on a double lock system. He shall be personally responsible for the safe custody of the above properties. The responsibilities to the Accounts of the Cash Balance, jewels and other asse
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.