A. D. DESAI, T. U. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) BOTH these petitions arise out of the judgment and order recorded by the Presiding Officer 3 Labour Court Ahmedabad in Recovery Application No. 289/67 which was filed under sec. 33c (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (which is hereinafter referred to as the Act ). The learned Judge of the Labour Court has allowed the claim of Dr. Chandraprasad C. Trivedi who is respondent in Spl. C. A. No. 395/71 and petitioner in Spl. C. A. No. 511/71 so far as the bonus amount is concerned but has disallowed his claim for Dearness Allowance with the result that both the parties before the learned Judge of the Labour Court have preferred these cross applications.

( 2 ) SHORT facts of the case are that Dr. Chandraprasad C. Trivedi who is hereinafter referred to as the claimant was in the part time employment of the Arun Mills Ltd. which is hereinafter referred to as the Mills and was drawing the basic pay of Rs. 175/per month and a fixed amount of Rs. 40/as Dearness Allowance. Facts of the case show that the services of the applicant were engaged as a physician in charge of the dispensary of the Mill for the first time on 6th December 1951 The claimant was expected to work at least for an hour in a day. He started with the basic pay of Rs. 26/per month but from the year 1955 the said basic pay was increased to the amount of Rs. 175/per month. It is an admitted fact that from the month of August 1955 he if also given dearness allowance at the rate of Rs. 40/per month.

( 3 ) THE claimant now claims dearness allowance not at the rate of Rs. 40/per month but at usual rate which would be applicable to full time employees of the mill. He has thus claimed the dearness allowance which would be admissible to him from the year 1955. This claim is valued at Rs. 10200. 00. His further claim is for bonus from the year 1958.

( 4 ) EVIDENCE recorded in the case shows that the claimant is also running a private dispensary of his own from the year 1938 where he attends daily from 10. 00 am. to 12. 30 p. m. and thereafter from 6. 00 p. m. to 8. 30 p. m. He had also a consulting room of his own for the period from 1955 to 1965.

( 5 ) IT is further found that from the month of November 1954 the claimant is working as a part time doctor in Sarangpur Cotton Mill No. 1 as well as in Sarangpur Cotton Mill No. 2 he attends the said mill No. I on Monday Wednesday and Friday and mill No. 2 on rest of the days excepting Sunday. From Mill no. 1 he gets the salary of Rs. 250 plus dearness allowance while from mill no. 2 he gets Rs. 150/without dearness allowance. It is an admitted position that he gets bonus from both these Mills.

( 6 ) THE claim of dearness allowance and bonus advanced by the claimant is resisted by the Mills. Before the learned Judge of the Labour Court it was contended on behalf of the Mills that the claimant being a doctor is not covered by the definition of workman given in sec. 2 of the Act. According to the Mills therefore the claimant is neither entitled to any dearness allowance nor to any bonus. So far as the claim of dearness allowance is concerned the Mills has further contended that the claimant being a part time employee he is not entitled to claim any dearness allowance.

( 7 ) THE learned Judge of the Labour Court has found that the claimant is covered by the definition of the word workman given in sec. (2) (s) of the Act. The has further held that even though the claimant is a part time employee of the mill he is entitled to dearness allowance which should be proportionate to the time for which he is rendering his services every day. The learned Judge of the Labour Court has further recorded in this connection that since the dearness allowance of Rs. 40/which is paid to the claimant is more than what would be his legal claim to the proportionate dearness allowance nothing further is awardable to him He has therefore rejected the claimants claim for dearness Allowance As for the bonus the learned Judge

Click Here to Read the rest of this document