The main legal point established is that a Government owned establishment/authority/Company may be exempt from the provisions of certain Acts based on the interpretation of the term 'under' in the context of establishments under the Central Government.

JUDGMENT

1. By means of this petition, the Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) has sought for quashing of the proceedings initiated against it under section 21(1) of the Tripura Shops and Establishment Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in C.R. 310 of 2007 before the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dharmanagar, North Tripura.

2. The sole point raised in this petition is whether the IOC being a Government owned Corporation is not amenable to the provisions of the said Act.

3. The Tripura Shops and Establishment Act, 1970 came into force on 29-10-1970. Section 2(b) defines “commercial establishment” and it is not disputed that the IOC would fall within the meaning of a commercial establishment. However, the stand of the IOC is that the provisions of the Act are not applicable to it in view of section 4 of the Act which reads as follows:-

4.(1) This Act shall not apply to--

(a) offices of or under the Central or State Government, The Reserve Bank of India, any Railway Administration or any local authority;

4. The sole question is whether the IOC can be said to be an office or establishment under the Central Government. This question is, in fact, no longer res integra. The Apex Court in C.V. Raman v. Management of Bank of India and another,: AIR 1988 SC 1369] was dealing with the issue as to whether State Bank of India and other nationalized banks can be said to be establishments under the Central Government as per the provisions of the Tamilnadu Shops and Establishment Act, wording of which is similar to the present Act. The Apex Court held as follows:-

7. What has to be considered is as to whether the State Bank of India and the nationalised banks can be said to be establishments under the Central Government as contemplated by Cl. (c) aforesaid. What does the word “under” in the said clause mean in the context in which it appears? That is the crucial question which arises for consideration in these cases. The said word ‘under’ not having been defined in the concerned Acts, recourse may be had to its dictionary meanings. Some of them are as follows :-

“In or into a condition of Subjugation, regulation or subordination. “(Webster’s Third New International)

“Subordinate or lower rank or position”.

“In senses denoting subordination or subjugation, with abstract or other subject, denoting the authority or control, direction, case, examination, restraint, etc.”

“In or into a position or state of subjugation or submission. “(Shorter Oxford English Dictionary)

“Subordinate subjected to” (The Compact, Edition of the Oxford Dictionary)

“Subject to the authority, rule, control of”

“Subject to the supervision instruction or influence. of “(The Grolier International Dictionary)

“In a position of inferiority or subordination to, subject to the rule, government, direction guidance, instruction, or influence of, as, he is under my care, I served under his father.”

“in a state of liability, obligation.”

“Lower in authority, position, power etc., subordinate.”

“held in control or restraint, used predicatively. “(Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language-Encyclopaedia)

“The term sometimes used in its literal sense of ‘below in position’ but more frequently in its secondary meaning of ‘inferior’ or subordinate.” (Boviar’s Law Dictionary)

“Inferior, subordinate, of lower rank or position (10)-Denoting subordination to; or control by, a person or persons having or exercising, recognising authority or command.”

“with abstract or other subs. denoting authority or control, with or without specification of the person or persons exercising it.” (The Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary)

“Under has the same significance as by virtue of “by or through the authority of” (In Venkataramiya’s Law Lexicon)

“The word “under” may be used in statute in its literal sense as indicating condition of inferiority or subservience or as meaning subject to or in conformity with, denoting curtailment or restriction of, but nevertheless agreeme