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

1993 Supreme(Ker) 126

P.K.SHAMSUDDIN
Thomas Eapen – Appellant
Versus
Asst. Labour Officer – Respondent


Judgment :-

Petitioner is the Managing Partner of Kadampuzha Hospital, Kanjirappally.

Respondents 3 to 5 are working as nurses in the said institution. The first respondent issued three notices, Exts.P1, P1 (a) and P1 (b) to the petitioner alleging that the petitioner failed to comply with the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act in the cases of respondents 3 to 5. The petitioner sent a reply Ext. P2 stating that hospitals were not covered by the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act. Thereafter a notice was issued by the first respondent stating that respondents 3 to 5 were not allowed prenatal leave as contemplated under the Act and requiring the petitioner to show cause as to why an amount of Rs.1031.25 should not be directed to be paid to T. A. Thressiakutty, the fifth respondent towards maternity benefit and medical bonus. On receipt of this the petitioner sent Ext. P4 reiterating his contention and pointing out that the Government have issued notification No. LDS 2156/57 L & LAD dated 17-4-1957 published in the Kerala Gazette. dated 23-4-57 exempting establishments in the erstwhile Travancore-Cochin area like doctors consulting rooms, dispensaries attached to doctors cons














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