Delhi Shops and Establishments Act,1954 — Physical PDF page 23 of 27

might tend to incriminate him. However, the Chief Inspector or Inspector concerned may require
any employer to produce authentic extract from the record of any school, Panchayat or
municipality or in the absence of such extract to produce at his own expense a certificate of age
from a registered medical practitioner or a declaration from either of the parents or if the parents
are not alive from the nearest living relation or any other evidence of age to the satisfaction of the
Chief Inspector or the Inspector, as the case may be, in respect of any young person employed
whose age he may have reason to doubt. See Rule 17 of the Delhi Shops and Establishments
Rules, 1954 as also the Notification No. 12 (23)/55 I & L., dated 2-1-1957.
     38. Inspectors to be public servants.—The Chief Inspector and every Inspector appointed
under section 36 shall be deemed to be a public servant within the meaning of section 21 of the
Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860).
                                              COMMENTS
     This section contemplates that the Chief Inspector and every Inspector appointed under
section 36 shall be deemed to be a public servant. In short, every person in the service or pay of
the Government or remunerated by fees or commission for the performance of any public duty by
the Government or in the service or pay of the local authority or corporation established by or
under a Central, Provincial or State Act or a Government Company, is a public servant. To state it
differently, the Chief Inspector and other Inspectors appointed under section 36 of this Act are
immune from suits, prosecution and legal proceedings if they do or intend to do anything in good
                                                                   e
faith while acting under the direction of any public servant in pursuance of the provisions of this
Act.                                                         od
     39. Protection to persons acting under this Act.—No suit, prosecution, or other legal
                                                       aC
proceedings shall lie against any public servant or any other person in the service of this Union
Territory acting under the direction of any such public servant for anything in good faith done or
                                                  di
intended to be done in pursuance of the provisions of this Act or any rule or order made
thereunder.
                                              In
                                              COMMENTS
     The object of this section is to afford protection to a public servant or any other person in the
service of this Union Territory acting under the direction of any such public servant for anything
done or intended to be done in good faith for carrying out the provisions of this Act or any rule or
order made thereunder. But a plain reading of this section shows that it not only protects the
inspecting staff but its protection also extends to any public servant or any other person in the
service of the Union Territory of Delhi acting under the direction of any inspecting staff for
anything done in good faith or intended to be done in pursuance of the provisions of this Act or
any rule or order made thereunder; State of Gujarat v. Kausara Manilal Bhikhanlal, AIR 1964 SC
1893: (1965) (1) Cri. LJ 90: (1964) 9 Fac. LR 147: (1964-65) 26 FJR 277: (1964) 2 Lab. LJ 456:
(1965) 2 SCJ 385. (In this case the Supreme Court was constructing a similar provision of the
Factories Act). The tests for determining whether section 39 applies to a suit, prosecution or other
legal proceedings are: (1) whether the person proceeded against can reasonably claim that the
act complained of and done or intended to be done by him was necessitated by one or more of
the provisions of the Act, and (2) whether he acted in good faith to give effect to the provisions of
the Act. The first test could be satisfied if a duty, whether of a positive or of a negative character,
was addressed to him by the provisions of the Act, the second test could be satisfied if he acted
under an honest belief that he was carrying out the provisions of the Act; Public Prosecutor v.
Vattem Venkataramaya, 24 FJR 198 (AP HC): (1962) 5 Fac. LR 180: (1963) (1) Cri. LJ 283: AIR
1963 AP 106: 1962 II LLJ 21 (AP).
     40. Penalties.—(1) If in any shop or establishment there is any contravention of any of the
provisions of this Act, or any rule or order made thereunder except sections 33, 41 and 42, the
proprietor, the employer or the manager thereof as the case may be, shall, on conviction, be
punished with fine which shall not be less than twenty-five rupees and which may extend to two
hundred and fifty rupees.
     (2) If any person contravenes the provisions of section 33, he shall be liable, on conviction, to
a fine of Rs. 5 for every day on which the contravention occurs or continues.
                                              COMMENTS