2007 Supreme(SC) 617

2007(4) Supreme 90
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Allahabad High Court)
S.B. Sinha & Markandey Katju, JJ
M/s. Hamdard (Wakf) Laboratories
— Petitioner
versus
Deputy Labour Commr. & Ors
— Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 2204 OF 2007
[Arising out of SLP(Civil) No.17526 of 2006]
Decided on : 27-04-2007

IMPORTANT POINT
Bonus does not ordinarily include wages. Bonus may be a deferred wage, but not in the context of backwages. A claim for bonus can be raised only by raising an industrial dispute. It cannot be raised by way of an execution application A Labour Commissioner is not a judicial authority. It is for the State Government to construe an award, in the event any dispute arises in giving effect thereto. Section6-H(1) of the U.P. I.D. Act, 1947 provides for a proceeding which is in the nature of an execution proceeding and can be invoked in the event any money is due to a workman under an award. It cannot be invoked in a case where ordinarily an industrial dispute can be raised and referred to for adjudication.

Headnote:U.P. I.D. Act, 1947 – Section6-H(1) – It provides for a proceeding which is in the nature of an execution proceeding and can be invoked in the event any money is due to a workman under an award; it cannot be invoked in a case where ordinarily an industrial dispute can be raised and referred to for adjudication – Therefore, the authorities to determine a matter arising under Section 6-H(1) of the Act and an industrial dispute raised by the workmen are different. (Para 18) U.P. I.D. Act, 1947 – Section 11-B – A Labour Commissioner is not a judicial authority – It is for the State Government to construe an award, in the event any dispute arises in giving effect thereto. (Para 19) Judicial Precedent – A judgment, it is trite, must be reasonable – It must be construed in such a manner so as not to offend the provisions of any statute and it must not be held to be contrary to any statutory provisions. (Para 24) (2001) 5 SCC 762 – Relied upon. U.P. I.D. Act, 1947 – Section 2(y) r/w Section 2(21) of the Payment of Bonus Act, – Bonus – Bonus either in its ordinary meaning or statutory ones would not include wages – However, bonus may be a deferred wage but in a different context – When used in the context of ‘backwages’ and that too 50% of it, the same would not include backwages – the Labour Commissioner as well as the High Court committed a manifest error in opining that bonus in instant case is deferred wages. (Paras 28, 29 and 40) (1955) 1 SCR 991; (1958) SCR 1504; (1969) 1 SCR 366 – Distinguished. Interpretation of statutes – When an interpretation clause uses the word “includes”, it is prima facie extensive – When it uses the word “mean and include”, it will afford an exhaustive explanation to the meaning which for the purposes of the Act must invariably be attached to the word or expression – When the statute provides for a remedy in a particular manner, the same cannot be achieved by filing an application which subserves a different purport and object. (Paras 34 and 37) 2007 (4) SCALE 361 – Relied upon. Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 – Section 22 – A claim for bonus can be raised only by raising an industrial dispute – It cannot be raised by way of an execution application – A claim made under an award attains finality when the amount payable thereunder is calculated – Bonus being a subject matter of claim in the first application filed under Section 6-H(1) of the U.P. I.D. Act, 1947, and the amount payable thereunder having been determined; another application under Section 6-H(1) of the Act for the purpose of enforcement of the award was not maintainable (Para 36).

       Facts of the case :

       1.As far back in the year 1983, the appellant terminated the services of 37 workmen allegedly on the ground that they had gone on an illegal strike. It gave rise to an industrial dispute. The management and its 19 workmen entered into compromise. One workman died during pendency of the said dispute. Claim of 17 workmen, therefore, survived for adjudication in the aforementioned industrial dispute. Industrial court directed reinstatement of the workers with 50% back wages.

       2.The present matter relates to payment of bonus for the disputed period.

       Findings of the Court :

       Bonus does not ordinarily include wages. Bonus may be a deferred wage, but in a different context. When used in the context of ‘backwages’ and that too 50% of it, bonus would not include backwages. Labour Commissioner as well as the High Court committed a manifest error in opining that bonus in instant case is deferred wages.