Skip to content


Emperor Vs. Gokuldas Haridas - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectLabour and Industrial;Criminal
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Application for Revision No. 399 of 1928
Judge
Reported in(1929)31BOMLR544
AppellantEmperor
RespondentGokuldas Haridas
Excerpt:
.....backward classes and special backward category (regulation of issuance and verification of) caste certificate act (23 of 2001), sections 6 & 10: [s.b. mhase, a.p. deshpande & p.b. varale, jj] caste certificate petitioner seeking appointment against the post reserved for member of schedule tribe his caste certificate was invalidated subsequently held, his appointment would not be protected. the observations/directions issued by supreme court in para 36 of judgment in the case of state v millind reported in 2001 91) mah. lj sc 1 is not the law declared by supreme court under article 141 of the constitution of india. said observations/directions are issued in exercise of powers under article 142 of the constitution and also have no application to the cases relating to appointments and..........of a certificate granted under section 7 or section 8 showing that he is not less than twelve years of age and is fib for employment in a factory and while at work carries either the certificate itself or a token giving reference to such certificate.2. it is admitted that the girls were not in possession of any such certificate or token. the certificate required by section 23 must state in the ease of a child who has completed twelve years that he or she is fit for employment in a factory, dewan bahadur rao has contended before us that in the case of a child of fourteen there is no need for such a certificate. we do not agree with that contention.3. the rules in these three cases are discharged.
Judgment:

Mirza, J.

1. It is found that the girls employed in the factory were aged fourteen years. They would, therefore, come under the definition of 'child' in the Indian Factories Act. Section 23, Clause (a), requires that:-

no child shall be employed in any factory unless he is in possession of a certificate granted under Section 7 or Section 8 showing that he is not less than twelve years of age and is fib for employment in a factory and while at work carries either the certificate itself or a token giving reference to such certificate.

2. It is admitted that the girls were not in possession of any such certificate or token. The certificate required by Section 23 must state in the ease of a child who has completed twelve years that he or she is fit for employment in a factory, Dewan Bahadur Rao has contended before us that in the case of a child of fourteen there is no need for such a certificate. We do not agree with that contention.

3. The rules in these three cases are discharged.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //