TMI Blog1992 (8) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M., SHARMA, L.M., MOHAN, S., VENKATACHALA N. JJ. JUDGMENT: From the Judgements and Orders dated 23.5.79, 30.5.79, 25.6.79, 26.6.79 and 9.7.1979 of the Kerala High Court in M.F.A. Nos. 69, 76, 80, 81, 83, 89 and 75 of 1977. A.T.M. Sampath for the Appellant in C.A. No. 2593/80. V.A. Bobde, O.C. Mathur, Ms. Meera and D.N. Mishra for the Appellant in C.A. No. 2594-99/80. V.A. Bobde, O.C. Mathur, Ms. Meera and D.N Mishra for the Respondent in C.A. No. 2593/80. N.N. Goswamy, V.C. Mahajan, Hemant Sharma and Mrs. Anil Katiyar for the Respondent. The Judgements of the Court were delivered by SHARMA, J. The learned counsel for the respondent has, in support of his stand, placed reliance on several decisions of this Court and the High courts in which the notification in identical terms has been construed in the way as is suggested on behalf of the Corporation. Although Mr. Bobde, learned counsel for the appellant has advanced an argument, which on the face of it, appears to be attractive, I think that in view of the consistent interpretation of the notification which has been followed in the country, the question should not be reopened for fresh consideration. Accordingly, I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce being rendered at the appellant's office establishment, it was urged that it could not be called a shop within the dictionary meaning. An application was moved under Section 75 of the Act before the Employees, Insurance Court, Calicut to decide the dispute and to hold that the appellant was not a shop within the purview of the Act and, therefore, the Act itself was inapplicable. Objections were preferred on behalf of the Regional Director, Employees State Corporation that in view of the notification dated 18.9.74 supplemented by the other notifications dated 2.12.74 and 22.3.75, the appellant's business would fall within the ambit of the said notifications. The Government of Kerala issued thosenotifications with a view to extend benefits to the employees working in other sections of organized labour such as shops and establishments. The Employees Insurance Court by a judgement dated 29.1.77 in E.I.C. No. 1/76 held that the appellant would be covered with effect from six months after 21.12.74. In the result, the appellant was brought within the notification. Against this order, M.F.A. No. 75 of 1977 was preferred to the High Court of Kerala. A Division Bench by its judgem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity is pursued and where services are rendered to the customers. In so far as the appellant is carrying on the business of clearing and forwarding and rendering service which are part of carrier's job certainly it will be a shop. It caters to the needs of exporters and importers. It is a systematic commercial activity or an economic activity. Hence, it would be a shop within the meaning of the notification. Merely because every establishment may fall within the scope of the term "shop" as enumerated, it does not, in any way, restrict the meaning of the word "shop". The object of enumeration is to envelop as many establishments as possible without leaving room for any doubt, where, therefore, the word "shop" alone would be enough to cover the activities of the appellant, it is not necessary to further enumerate and specifically bring within the scope of the notification the activities of the appellant. Regard must be had in this connection that this is a social welfare legislation. This Court had always taken the view that as far as permissible the endeavour of the Court must to be cover those employees than to deny the benefit of these provisions. In support of these submissions th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... noor) in Trivandrum of the preceding twelve months, District. namely. 2. Quilon, Kundara, Chathannur, Kottaraka, Punalur an Sast hamcotta in Quilon District. (i) Hotels; 3. Alleppey, Kayamkulam and Shertailai in Alleppey District. (ii) Restaurants; 4. Kottayam town in kottayam District. (iii) Shops 5. Ernakulam and Cochin in Ernakulam District. (iv)Road Motor Transport 6. Trichur town in Trichur establishment; (v) Cinema including preview 7. Palghat town in Palghat theatres; District. (iv)Newspaper establishments 8. Kozhikode town in as defined in Section 2 Kozhikode District and (d) of the Working Journalists (Conditions of Service) 9. Cannanore town, Tellich- and Miscellaneous Provisions erry and Baliapatam in Act, 1955 (5 of 1955). Cannanore District in the State of Kerala. By order of the Governor, Sd/ U. Mahabala Rao, Secretary to Government" As it could be seen, six kinds of establishments wherein 20 or more employees are or were employed for wages on any day of the preceding 12 would months fall within the scope of the notification. Item 3 says "shops". Therefore, the argument is while "shop" could cover the other establishments like hotels or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p to which the Act is applicable by virtue of the notification referred to above. The first contention, therefore, fails" Again, in M/s. International Ore Fertilizers (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Employees' State Insurance Corporation [1987] 4 SCC 203 at 206 the following useful observations are found: "The word "shop" is not defined in the Act or in the notification issued by the State Government. According to the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary the expression "shop" means "a house or building where goods are made or prepared for sale and sold". It also means a "place of business" or place where one's ordinary occupation is carried on". In ordinary parlance a "shop" is a place where the activities connected with the buying and selling of goods are carried on. The evidence produced in the case shows that the petitioner is carrying on its business at its business premises in Secunderabad. At that place the petitioner carries on the commercial activity facilitating the emergence of contracts of sale of goods between its foreign principals and the State Trading Corporation/Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation of India. It arranges for the unloading of the goods under its supervisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cific enumeration, so as to include the appellant's business activity, is to be insisted upon. In our considered view, this argument cannot be accepted. First of all, merely because other establishments which are akin to shop are enumerated, it does not, in any manner, oblige us to give a narrow meaning to the word "shop" nor does it any way dilute the meaning of "shop". As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the respondent, the object is to envelope as many establishments as possible without leaving any room for doubt. That is precisely what the notification intends to do. The appellant is carrying on stevedoring, clearing and forwarding operations. Clearing the documents, even it be in the custom house, is the carrier's job. It cannot be gainsaid that the appellant is rendering service to cater the needs of exporters and importers and others who want to carry the goods further. Therefore, it is a shop carrying on a systematic economic or a commercial activity. This would be enough to bring the appellant without specifically enumerating the specific activities carried on by the appellant. Merely because shop has been enumerated along with other similar establishment we do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
