Chandra Bhavan Coffee and Meals Hotel Nellore vs S.V. Rathnam and others

Chennakesav Reddy

This revision case raises a short but important question of law. The question is whether an Additional District Munsif in the Andhra Area can entertain an application filed by the employees in an establishment u/s 43 of the A.P. Shops and Establishments Act 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for deciding claims arising out of deduction from wages or delay in payment of wages or gratuity to the employees. Section 43 of the Act reads as follows: "The Government may by notification appoint a judicial authority to hear and decide for any specified area claims arising out of the deduction from the wages or delay in payment of wages or gratuity payable under this Act to employees in any establishment in that area".

In exercise of the powers conferred u/s 43 of the Act, the Governor of Andhra Pradesh by a notification issued in GO, 635 Home (Lab-II) dated 30-4-1968 appointed all the District Munsifs and the Munsif Magistrates in the Andhra area and the Munsif Magistrates in Telangana area other than the area comprised in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad as the judicial authorities to hear and decide all claims arising out of deductions from the wages or delay in payment of wages or gratuity payable under the Act to employees within the local area of their respective jurisdictions.

In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sec. 2 of section II of the Cr. P.C. 1973 the High Court of Andhra Pradesh by a notification in Roc. 25/50/74-1 dated 28-3-1974 appointed with effect from 1-4-1974 all District Munsifs within their respective Munsifies to be Judicial Magistrates of the 1st Class end conferred on them all the powers of a Judicial Magistrate of the 1st Class under the said Crl. P.C. 1973 or under any other law for the time being in force.

It thus emerges from the aforesaid notification that all District Munsifs within their respective munsifies are also Judicial Magistrates of the 1st Class. In other words every District Munsif is District Munsif-cum-1st Class Magistrate and has therefore the power to hear and decide claim petitions filed u/s 43 of the Act. In this case the employees of Chandra Bhavan Coffee and Meals Hotel, Trunk Road, Nellore filed an application u/s 43 of the Act before the 2nd Addl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate Nellore. He is an Additional District Munsif. He entertained the application and directed issue of notice to the respondent. The respondent thereupon filed Cr. M.P. 712/76 contending that the Court of the 2nd Addl. Judicial 1st Cass Magistrate, Nellore had no jurisdiction to entertain an application u/s 43 of the Act. The learned Magistrate dismissed the application holding that by virtue of G.O. Ms. 635 Home (Lab. 11) dated 30-4-1968 both the District Munsifs as well as the Munsif Magistrates in Andhra area are empowered to decide the claims and therefore the application filed by the employees was maintainable. 2. The question is whether an Additional District Munsif has the power to receive and decide a claim application u/s 43 of the Act, The answer to this question must be found from the- provisions of section 13 of the A.P. Civil Courts Act, 1972. Section 13 reads as follows:

13(1). Wherein the opinion of the High Court, a state of business pending in the court of Subordinate Judge or District Munsif so requires, the Government may, after consultation with the High Court appoint one or more Additional Subordinate Judges to the court of Subordinate Judge or one or more Additional District Munsifs to the Court of the District Munsif for such period as they may deem necessary.

(2) Where more than one Subordinate Judge is appointed to a Court of a Subordinate Judge or more than one District Munsif is appointed to a Court of District Munsif, one of the Subordinate Judges or District Munsifs shall be designated by the High Court as the Principal Subordinate Judge or the Principal District Munsif and the others as Additional Subordinate Judges or as Additional District Munsifs as the case may be. (3) Each of the Subordinate Judges or District Munsifs appointed to a Court of Subordinate Judge or to a court of District Munsif, as the case may be, may exercise all or any of the powers conferred on such courts by this Act, or any other law for the time being.

(2) Subject to the general or special Orders, of the District Judge, the Principal Subordinate Judge or the Principal District Munsif may, from time to time, make such arrangements as he thinks fit for the proper distribution of the business of the court among the Subordinate Judges or District Munsifs as the case may be.

Section 13 (1) empowers the Government after consultation with the High Court to appoint one or more Additional District Munsifs to the Court of the District Munsif where the state of business pending in that Court, in the opinion of the High Court, so requires. Under sub-section (2) where more than one District Munsif is appointed to a Court of District Munsif, the High Court shall designate on of the District Munsifs as Principal District Munsif and the others as Additional District Munsifs. Under sub-section 3 the other District Munsifs appointed to the Court of the District Munsif may exercise all or any of the powers conferred on such court by the Act or any other law for the time being. In sub-section 4 the Principal District Munsif is enabled to make such arrangements as he thinks fit for the proper distribution of the business of the Court amongst Munsifs subject to the general or special Order of the District Judge.

Where more than one District Munsif is appointed to a Court of District Munsif, the Dist. Munsif designated by the High Court as the Principal District Munsif has by virtue of his position as Dist. Munsif has power to receive, hear and dispose of all suits and proceedings not otherwise exempted from his cognizance under any other law for the time being in force, the amount of value of which does not exceed 10,000/-. An Additional Munsif who exercises powers of a District Munsif gets jurisdiction to deal only with such suits or proceedings which are distributed or made over to him by the Principal District Munsif or the District Judge by a general or special Order. An Additional District Munsif is not competent by virtue of his office to receive, hear or dispose of any matter submitted to him or filed before him directly. This view of mine is fortified by a Full Bench decision of this Court in In Re In Re: Pasupulati Nanjappa, In that case the learned Judges were dealing with the of power of an Additional Sessions Judge to receive and hear appeals of persons convicted by Second or Third Class Magistrates. u/s 409 (2) Cr. P.C. an Additional Sessions Judge or Asst. Sessions shall hear only such appeal as the State Government may by general or special Order direct or as the Sessions Judge of the Division may make over to him. The State Government in a G.O. issued u/s 409 (2) Crl. P.C., directed that the Additional District and Sessions Judge shall hear all appeals of persons convicted on trial held by the Magistrate of the Second or Third Class. In that case the Additional Sessions Judge, Cuddapah received a criminal appeal presented by a person on a trial held by the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Cuddapah and disposed it of. A revision petition was filed against the judgement of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. The Full Bench observed:

It cannot be said that the direction to hear, contained in the G.O. implied or included a power to receive, admit and take on file.

Section 409 (2) under which the G.O. was passed, does not authorise the State Government to direct any Additional or Asst. Sessions Judge to receive and admit or authorise any convicted accused to present such appeals before an Additional Sessions Judge. Sec. 409 (2) also does not expressly or by implication give power to an Addl or Asst. Sessions Judge: to receive appeals direct from parties and to admit them and to take them on files.

Gopal Rao Ekbote, J. (as he then was) in Pentiah V. Charanlal Srikishan 1968 (II) An. W.R. 487 dealing with the question whether the 1st Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad could receive an appeal filed u/s 17 of the Hyderabad Shops and Establishment Act directly, observed :

It thus becomes plain that the 1st Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad has not been either by a general circular or specially in this case authorised by the proper authority to receive the appeal and hear and dispose it of. I am, therefore clear in my view that the 1st Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad was not authorised to receive the appeal filed u/s 17 of the Hyderabad Shops and Establishments Act directly and that therefore he has no jurisdiction to dispose it of.

It would be relevant to mention that u/s 17 of the Hyderabad Shops and Establishments Act an appeal has to be filed before the District Court and under sub-section 3 of Section 4 of the Hyderabad Civil Courts Act, 1954 an Additional District Judge shall discharge all or any of the functions of the District Judge under this Act or any other law for the time being in force which the District Judge may assign to him.

The learned counsel Mr. Kannatiram relied upon a decision of the Madras High Court in T.R. Babu Vs. M.S. Shanmugham Chettiar] 1965 (II) M.L.J. 15 and attempted to sustain the Order under revision on the ground that the distribution of business by the Principal District Munsifisan administrative power and that when once a Munsif has taken cognizance of a suit, it can only be transferred u/s 24 C.P.C. In that case the Principal Subordinate Judge had made over the Suit to the Addl. Subordinate Judge and the Addl. Subordinate Judge had taken judicial cognizance of the suit. The learned Judge in those circumstances held that section 4 (a) of Act III/1873 does not authorise the Principal Subordinate Judge to make a retransfer to his own file of a suit already distributed to another Judge of which that court had taken cognizance. That decision therefore cannot be of assistance to the learned counsel in this case in which there was no distribution at all made by the Principal District Munsif. For the reasons aforesaid the Order under revision is set aside and the learned II Addl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Nellore is directed to return the application of the employees for presentation to the principal District Munsif Nellore. Accordingly the revision is allowed.