South Indian Bank Ltd vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Labour on 2 December, 2014
43. Management of Akkur Primary Agricultural Co-op. Bank Ltd., represented by
its Special Officer, Akkur v. Gnanasekaran and another reported in 1997-II-
LLJ 959.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.85 seconds)The Management vs The Appellate Authority on 30 November, 2020
9. Facts of the case are not in dispute. It is seen that, the 2nd
Respondent has admitted her guilt, in writing and has paid the deficit amount to
the Petitioner/Society. The contention of the Petitioner/Society that, the 2nd
Respondent is in the habit of misappropriating Society funds, plead mercy
thereafter and later get reinstated into service, cannot be brushed aside. As
regards the second contention of the Petitioner/Society that, the order passed by
the 1st Respondent against the Society cannot be allowed to stand, as it has no
jurisdiction, it is seen that, the First Bench of this Court in the case of
Management of Akkur Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank Ltd., vs.
Gnanasekaran (cited supra), has allowed the Writ Appeal by holding that, the
Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishment Act does not apply to Akkur
Panchayat, based on the Affidavit dated 15.11.2006 filed by the Commissioner
of Labour, before the Court.
The South Indian Bank Ltd vs The Joint Commissioner Of Labour on 3 November, 2025
i)Management of Akkur Primary Agricultrual Co-op. Bank
Ltd. Vs. Gnanasekaran reported in 2007(3) LLN 516.
The Special Officer vs Deputy Commissioner Of Labour on 12 September, 2007
9. A similar situation came up for consideration before a Division Bench
of this Court (to which I am a party) vide judgment reported in 2007 (3) L.L.N.
516 [Management of Akkur Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank Ltd., v.
Gnanasekaran], wherein this Court has held that unless a Village Panchayat is
covered either under Section 1(3)(a)(iii) or 1(3)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Shops and
Establishments Act, the question of applying the said Act will not arise. This
being a legal issue, the authority is bound to answer the said issue before he
clutches on to any jurisdiction.
The Management vs The Appellate Authority Under The on 1 August, 2017
Mr.V.O.S.Kalaiselvam, learned counsel for the appellant relied on the
decision reported in 2007 (2) MLJ 461 (Management of Akkur Primary
Agricultural Co-operative Bank Ltd., Vs. Gnanasekaran and another) in which
it has been held by the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court that the
applicability of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments
Act to a village Panchayat would depend on whether the said Panchayat has
been notified under Section 1 (3) (b) of the said Act. If such a
notification has not been issued notifying that the provisions of TNSE Act
would be applicable to the said Panchayat, the said act will not apply to the
employees of the institution situated in the said panchayat limit and they
cannot invoke Section 41 of the TNSE Act. The learned counsel for the
appellant further contended that the appellant society is located in
Sadhananthapuram village and that the said village Panchayat has not been
notified under Section 1 (3) (b) of TNSE Act, 1947.
1