Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"One to whom a charge is committed, or who performs a function; . . . one who holds an office, post or place . . . a functionary authoritatively appointed or elected to exercise some public, municipal or corporate function; . . . an office-bearer."

9. He also drew our attention to the observations of Cockburn, C.J., in Hartley v. Banks [(1858) 5 C.B.N.S. at 55] to the effect that "an officer necessarily implies that there is some duty to be performed." He submitted that the essential thing is that an officer should be a functionary having duties to perform and powers which he could exercise individually. The labour court has relied upon the view expressed by Tendolkar, J. In Alembic Chemical Works Company, Ltd., and another v. Vyas (P. D.) and another [1954 - II L.L.J. 148]. After referring to the two extreme views that can possibly be expressed in so far as S. 36(a) is concerned, his lordship observed that an officer contemplated by Sub-section (1) or (2) of S. 36 "is a regular officer either of the trade union or the association . . ." This decision is of little assistance in determining the instant issue.