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

1958 Supreme(Cal) 295

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
K. C. Das Gupta, R. S. Bachawat
B. N. ELIAS AND CO. PRIVATE LTD. - Appellant
Versus
G. P. MUKHERJEE - Respondent
A. F. O. O.  126  Of  1958 (Matter No. 67 Of 1957)
Decided On : DECEMBER 24, 1958

Advocates Appeared:
P.P.Ginwalla, SANAT MUKHERJI

A dispute which has been determined by an award made on a previous reference is not capable of being an industrial dispute during the period of operation of that award.

Headnote:

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES - REFERENCE OF DISPUTE - JURISDICTION OF TRIBUNAL - MATTERS CONCLUDED BY PREVIOUS AWARD - INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947, SECTIONS 10(1), 10(4), 18, 19(3), 19(6).

Fact of the Case:

The dispute related to the scale of dearness allowance of the subordinate staff of B. N. Elias and Company, Private Limited. The Government referred the dispute to the Second Industrial Tribunal. The employers challenged the order of reference and the jurisdiction of the Tribunal on the ground that the dispute had been determined by the award made on the previous reference and was not capable of being an industrial dispute during the period of operation of that award.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the dispute as to the dearness allowance was not referred by the previous order of reference and was not directly and substantially in issue in the previous proceedings. The observations in the award of the Second Industrial Tribunal and in the decision of the Appellate Tribunal with regard to dearness allowance were mere expressions of opinion and not their decisions. Therefore, the matters in dispute in the present reference were not concluded by the previous reference and the award and decision made thereon.

Issues: Whether the dispute as to the dearness allowance was concluded by the previous award and decision made thereon.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the dispute as to the dearness allowance was not referred by the previous order of reference and was not directly and substantially in issue in the previous proceedings. The observations in the award of the Second Industrial Tribunal and in the decision of the Appellate Tribunal with regard to dearness allowance were mere expressions of opinion and not their decisions. Therefore, the matters in dispute in the present reference were not concluded by the previous reference and the award and decision made thereon.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and held that the Second Industrial Tribunal had jurisdiction to consider and decide the matters referred to it.

B. S. BACHAWAT, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal arises out of writ proceedings relating to an industrial dispute between the employers B. N. Elias and Company, Private Limited, and associated concerns and their workmen represented by B. N. Elias and Co. Ltd. Employees Union. B. N. Elias and Company, Private Limited, has, at all material times, been a member of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry. Most of the members of the Bengal Chamber of Commerce and Industry adopted model terms of service for their clerical and subordinate staff calculated with reference to the middle class cost of living index. In 1948 industrial disputes between numerous concerns including the appellants and the workmen were referred to the Mercantile Tribunal. The award of the Mercantile Tribunal is dated the 17th February, 1949. Under that award the grade of the subordinate staff was Rs. 30--1--40--E. B.--1-50 and the dearness allowance as existing under the Bengal Chamber of Commerce scheme was maintained. The Mercantile Tribunal proceeded on the principle that the minimum total emoluments should be Rs. 60/- out of which at least Rs. 30/- should be the basic wages and directed that the minimum basic wages of a member of the subordinate staff should be pulled up to Rs. 30/- by deducting such amount from the dearness allowance as was required to make up the deficiency in the basic wages, provided the total emoluments were not below Rs. 60/ -. After the expiry of the period of the operation of this award, the Bengal Chamber of Commerce recommended to its members that the dearness allowance of the subordinate staff should be linked with the rise and fall in the working-class cost of living index instead of the middle-class cost of living index. Thereupon, certain adjustments having been made pursuant to this recommendation the workmen raised disputes. By an order dated the 30th August. 1955, the Government referred to the Industrial Tribunal the industrial disputes between the appellants and their workmen regarding, inter alia, 'fixation of grades and scales of pay of all categories of workmen including clerks, typists, stenographers, telephone and dictaphone operators, subordinate staff etc. ' The Industrial Tribunal by its award dated the 29th March, 1956, did not make any change with regard to the grade and scale of pay of the subordinate staff, holding that no revision was called for at that stage. Both workmen and employers appealed from this award. By its decision dated the 18th September, 1956, the Appellate Tribunal rejected the appeal of the workmen with regard to their demands relating to the subordinate staff observing that their total emoluments were quite satisfactory and did not call for any revision or interference. The Appellate Tribunal however modified the award with regard to certain other matters and accordingly by Section 16 of the Industrial Disputes (Appellate Tribunal) Act the decision of the Appellate Tribunal is deemed to be substituted for the award of the Industrial Tribunal and has effect for all purposes in the same manner and in accordance with the same law under which the award was made.

( 2 ) SUBSEQUENTLY, the workman represented by the respondent No. 2 raised disputes with regard to the dearness allowance of the subordinate staff. In April 1956, the Assistant Labour Commissioner called for a conference in which the representatives of B. N. Elias and Company, Private Limited and their workmen were invited to attend. There was a conference as called for. By a letter dated the 1st June, 1956, the Assistant Secretary to the Government of West Bengal informed the respondent) No. 2 that the dispute had been enquired into and that it appearing that the subordinate staff were well paid, the dispute did not deserve further intervention at this stage. In spite of this letter, we find that the Government by its order dated the 19th December, 1956 referred to the Second Industrial Tribunal the following disputes between B. N. Elias an


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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