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

1995 Supreme(Ker) 147

M.M.PAREED PILLAY, P.SHANMUGAM
Devadas – Appellant
Versus
Dy. Labour Commissioner – Respondent


Judgment :-

Pareed Pillay, C.J.

In the above Original Petitions the question that is mooted for consideration is whether the Assistant Secretary of Chittur Service Co-operative Bank is entitled to subsistence allowance during his period of suspension. Contention of the Society is that he would not be entitled to any subsistence allowance as he was holding the post of an Assistant Secretary at the time of his suspension. It is contended that for that reason he is not an employee as defined under S.2(a) of the Kerala Payment of Subsistence Allowance Act, 1972. Counsel for the Society argued that the Assistant Secretary was employed mainly in a managerial or administrative capacity and so he is disentitled from claiming subsistence allowance. Counsel relied on Sherthallai Taluk Co-op. Land Mortgage Bank Ltd. v. Deputy Labour Commissioner (1990 (2) KLT 175) where a Division Bench of this Court held that Secretary of a society who is in full charge of the executive administration is a person who is employed in a managerial capacity and hence cannot be regarded as an employee as defined in S.2(a) of the Subsistence Allowance Act. He also relied on Chittur Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. v. State








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