SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1968 Supreme(SC) 321

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.M. SHELAT, V. BHARGAVA AND C.A. VAIDIALINGAM, JJ.
The Workmen of Shri Bajrang Jute Mills Ltd., Appellants
Versus
The Employers of Shri Bajrang Jute Mills Ltd., Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 923 of 1966, D/- 31-10-1968. 879
Advocates appeared
Mr. M. K. Ramamurthi, Mrs. Shyamala Pappu and Vineat Kumar, Advocates, for Appellants; M/s. K. Srinivasamurthy, Naunit Lal and B. P. Singh, Advocates, for Respondents.

Advocates:
For the Appellants:Mr. Vishnu Gupta, Advocate
For the respondent(s):Mr. F.A. Natnoo, Advocate.

Headnote:

Labour Law - Workmen - Implementation of recommendations of Central Wages - Whether demand of workmen in Sri Bajrang Jute Mills, Limited, Guntur, for implementation of recommendations of Central Wage Board for Jute Industry is justified, and if so, to what extent - Wage Board was constituted by Central Government for determining, among other matters, a wage structure, based on principles of fair wages payable in jute industry - Wage Board consisted of a Chairman, two independent Members, two Members representing employers and two Members representing workers - Held, Various aspects, dealt with above, establish that essential pre-requisite of deciding wage structure, viz., to consider capacity of industry to pay on principles laid down by this Court, is absent in recommendations of Wage Board and that mendations of Wage Board and that introduces a fatal infirmity in its decision - Question of bonus does not arise for our consideration as respondent has stated that management has entered into a settlement with its workmen and that they will be entitled for bonus only if net profits exceed Rs. 75,000/-. It has further been stated that there is no available surplus to warrant payment of bonus - These statements have not been controverted on behalf of appellant - Appeal dismissed.

Judgment

VAIDIALINGAM J. : The workmen of Shri Bajrang Jute Mills Ltd., in this appeal by special leave, attack the correctness of the award dated May 29, 1965 of the Industrial Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, I. D. No. 12 of 1964, by which it held that the demand of the workmen for implementation of the recommendations of the Central Wage Board for Jute Industry (hereinafter referred to as the Wage Board), was not justified.

2. In view of the fact that the respondent-management declined to accede to the demand of the appellants to pay wages in accordance with the recommendations of the Wage Board, the State of Andhra Pradesh by its order dated March 21, 1964, referred for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Hyderabad, the following question :

"Whether the demand of the workmen in Sri Bajrang Jute Mills, Limited, Guntur, for implementation of the recommendations of the Central Wage Board for Jute Industry is justified, and if so, to what extent?"

3. The Wage Board was constituted by the Central Government for determining, among other matters, a wage structure, based on the principles of fair wages payable in the jute industry. The Wage Board consisted of a Chairman, two independent Members, two Members representing the employers and two Members representing the workers. It may be noted that the Members representing the industry and labour were not chosen by the representative bodies of the industry or the labour but were appointed by Government. In fact, neither the industry nor the labour had any voice in the choice by the Government of any of the members of the Wage Board. The Wage Board submitted its report to the Government, making recommendations about the wage structure any laying down principles for awarding bonus for the year 1962-63 and the subsequent years.

3-A. It appears from the Wage Board s report that, at the very outset, the Wage Board selected 20 mills from West Bengal and 9 reporting mills from outside West Bengal which it considered to form a representative cross-section of the industry for a detailed study. The Wage Board took into account the financial position of the said mills and also collected other data and information not only from the mills concerned but also from other quarters. The Wage Board took into account the growth of paid up capital, gross block depreciation, profits made and dividends paid by the mills and other allied matters and came to the conclusion that the industry s position was satisfactory and its future was bright. The Wage board was not required to fix a wage structure on the peculiar financial position of any particular unit, although it was bound to take a fair cross-section of the industry represented by units reflecting the general conditions prevailing in the industry as a whole. The Wage board also considered the principles for determination of bonus and recommended payment of bonus for the year 1963 on the basis of the basic wages drawn by the worker for the year 1962. It also recommended that for future years the bonus was to be paid according to the wages drawn in the preceding year. It further recommended certain rules for determination of the quantum of bonus. According to the appellants, the respondent was bound to implement the recommendations of the Wage Board in all respects and its refusal to do so was illegal and unjustified.

4. The respondent pleaded that the recommendations of the Wage Board could not be implemented as the Mill had no financial capacity to bear the burden of the wage scales recommended by the Wage Board. The respondent made an attempt to implement the Wage Board s recommendations to some extent at least, provided the labour agreed for revision of work loads, but the labour was not willing for such revision. It was further stated that the respondent company, though started in 1907, had been running at a loss for a number of years and its loom-strength was only 120. The mill was located at Guntur, which is not a jute-growing area, and in con





























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top