Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.K. MITTER, C.A. VAIDIALINGAM AND P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, JJ.
The Workmen employed by the Greaves Cotton and Co. Ltd. etc., Appellants
Versus
Greaves Cotton and Co. Ltd. etc., Respondents.
Civil Appeals Nos. 1239 to 1241 of 1966. D/- 24-8-1971
Advocates appeared
M/s. K. T. Sule, M. G. Phadnis and Vineet Kumar, Advocates, for Appellants. (In all the appeals); M/s. G. B. Pai, P. N. Tiwari and P. K. Rele, Advocates, and M/s J. B. Dadachanji and Co., Advocates, for Respondents. (In all the Appeals).
Industrial Disputes Act 1947 – Section 12, 12(4), 10 (1) (d), 12 (5), 2 (s) (iv), 2 (k), 2 (s) and 6 - Company - Workmen - Revised Wage Scales - Dearness Allowance - Whether Supervisors were workmen within meaning of Act - Whether decision contained in Award was correct - Whether there is community of interest between other workmen of Respondents and Supervisors who may be non-workmen - Whether some of workmen could raise a dispute regarding grades of Supervisors as there is a community of interest - Whether Supervisors getting less than Rs. 500/- per month on crucial date which is date of reference can raise dispute for wages - Whether workmen can raise a dispute about non-workmen - Whether dispute in relation to a person who is not a workman falls within scope of an industrial dispute under Section 2 (k) of Act - Whether dispute raised by such workmen regarding employment of rest of members of old staff was an industrial dispute - Whether in fact there are now any supervisors working in any of Companies - Whether as a matter of fact there are any workmen now working in a Supervisory capacity who are drawing more than Rs. 500/ - Whether today there are Supervisors working in Respondent Companies who are drawing a basic wage together with dearness allowance of less than Rs. 500/- as stated in affidavit – Held, In these circumstances Tribunal in Court view was wrong in holding that dispute regarding Supervisors was not maintainable merely because a demand was made for a higher wage scale, which would take them out of his category of workmen - Tribunal has jurisdiction to decide these matters because on crucial date supervisors were workmen and merely because of demand Tribunal does not lose its jurisdiction to prescribe pay scales and dearness allowance either by reason of fact that maximum will go beyond Rupees 500/- or that even initial pay demanded will be more than Rs. 500/ - Provided that at time of adjudication there are some at least in category who are workmen - In support of this contention that there are in fact no supervisors at present who can be termed workmen in two Companies learned Advocate for respondents asked for permission to file an affidavit which permission Court gave with liberty to Appellant to file a counter - Accordingly Appellant has filed a counter and Respondents have submitted their rejoinders - In annexure to affidavit reason given was that each one of Supervisors at time when statement was filed had ceased to be a Supervisor - Out of 15 persons, whose names were given, four resigned, 2 retired, one died, two retrenched and two were promoted as Technical Assistants - Remaining four of them are all drawing per month a salary of Rs. 545/50 as Grade II, Supervisors - These are S/Shri Deshmukh, Gurbax Singh, Kaslay and Pastakia - Entire argument of Respondents that any decision given by this Court would be otiose is based upon existence or non-existence of said fact - In view of omission to state specifically in counter names of persons who as of now are still working as Supervisors and drawing less than Rs. 500/- Court cannot but hold that averments made by Respondents that there are no employees who are working at present in a Supervisory capacity and who can be said to be Workmen have been substantiated - Appeals dismissed.
Judgment
P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, J.:- These three Appeals are by the Workmen of the three Respondent Companies respectively - Civil Appeal No. 1239 of 1966 is against Greaves Cotton & Co. Ltd., Civil Appeal No. 1240 of 1966 is against Greaves Cotton & Crompton Parkinson Pvt. Ltd., (later amalgamated in 1966 and a new Company formed as Crompton Greaves Ltd.,), and Civil Appeal No. 1241 of 1966 is against Kenyon Greaves Pvt. Ltd.
2. On the 29th April 1958 a charter of demands was presented by the Workmen through their Trade Union Greaves Cotton and allied Companies employees Union to the Respondents in the above three Appeals and to Ruston & Hornby India Pvt. Ltd. These demands were in respect of the wage scale, dearness allowance, leave gratuity etc. After the conciliation proceedings under sub-sec. (4) of S. 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (hereinafter called the Act ) had failed the disputes in respect of the aforesaid matters were ultimately referred by the Maharashtra Government to Shri P. D. Sawarkar for adjudication under Sec. 10 (1) (d) read with S. 12 (5) of the Act. In respect of demands made against Greaves Cotton & Co. Ltd., the reference was made on 8-4-59 and 24-12-59; against Greaves Cotton & Crompton Parkinson Pvt. Ltd., on 30-5-59 and 24-12-59 and that against Kenyon Greaves Pvt. Ltd., on 8-6-59 and 9-1-60 respectively. We are here not concerned with the other references. By an Award dated 3rd June, 15th and 16th June 1960 the Sawarkar Tribunal revised the wage scales and dearness allowance of all workmen employed by those Companies. Ruston & Hornby India Pvt. Ltd. appealed against the Awards to this Court which by a common judgment dated 14th November 1963 held that the wage scale and dearness allowance fixed by the Industrial Tribunal for the clerical and subordinate staff did not require any interference and to that extent dismissed the appeal. It however set aside the wage scale and dearness allowance fixed for factory workmen and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for fresh fixation of wage scale and dearness allowance with these observation:
"We allow the appeal with respect to the factory workmen and send the case back to the Tribunal for fixing the wage structure including basic wages and dearness allowance and for granting adjustments in the light of the observations by us. The new Award pursuant to this Award will come into force from the same date namely April 1, 1959".
3. When the references were taken up by the Tribunal on remand the parties agreed that in view of the decision of this Court certain references stood finally disposed of namely references dated 24-12-59 by the workmen in Greaves Cotton & Co., Ltd., and in Greaves Cotton & Crompton Parkinson Pvt. Ltd. and that dated 9-1-1960 by the workmen of Kenyon Greaves Pvt. Ltd. The other three which were also held to be finally disposed of were against the workmen of Ruston & Hornby India Pvt. Ltd., with which we are not concerned in this Appeal. The parties however, agreed that only three references dated 8-4-59, 30-5-59 and 8-6-59 by Workmen against Greaves Cotton & Co. Ltd., Greaves Cotton & Crompton Parkinson Pvt. Ltd., and Kenyon Greaves Pvt. Ltd., survive. During the proceedings before the Tribunal two questions were raised:
1) Whether the SC remanded the matter for consideration of the dispute in respect of certain categories of employees including those of the Supervisors; and
2) Whether it was open to the Respondents to claim fixation of service conditions on the basis of individual unit.
On behalf of the employees it was contended that the dispute regarding the Foremen or Supervisors who were included in the term subordinate staff was concluded by the Judgment of the SC in as much as it had dismissed the Appeal in respect of Clerical and subordinate staff. The employers on the other hand contended that the reference was in respect of the six categories of Workmen specified in the SC Judgment which included supervisors. Shri Athalye who w
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
