Inter-State Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1979 – Section 4, 6 – Quashing of Criminal Proceedings – Migrant Workmen – Not falls in definition of Industrial Establishment as it had not started business at relevant time. Held: Since the said restaurant, namely, “Mocha” was not opened on that day and no industry, trade, business, manufacture or occupation was carried out, and on such count, said restaurant cannot be termed as an „establishment‟ within the meaning of the definition of in Section 2(1)(d) of the 1979 Act and also under Section 2(8) of the Assam Shops and Establishment Act, 1971. To become an establishment it must be the industry and trade, business, manufacture or occupation has to be carried out therein.
Further, it appears that the allegations made in the complaint that the petitioner is the „principal employer‟ and as such, he has not registered under the aforesaid Act as required by Section 4 of the 1979 Act. But, it appears that the aforesaid restaurant, namely, “Mocha” is not an „establishment‟ within the meaning of definition in Section 2(1)(d) of the 1979 Act and as such, the petitioner cannot be termed as a „principal employer‟ as per definition in Section 2(1)(g) of the 1979 Act. It cannot be said that any offence under Section 4/6 and 25 of the 1979 Act is made out against the petitioner from a bare perusal of the complaint and accepting the allegation made therein as correct. Petition allowed. Proceedings quashed. (Section 11, 12, 13)
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
2023 STPL(Web) 133 Gauhati
[GAHC010023682015]
Shri Kaushik Baruah Vs. State Of Assam
Criminal Petition No. 855 of 2015-Decided on 29-9-2023
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2023-STPLWeb-133-Gauhati.pdf
