High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K. VEERASWAMI
Messrs K. P. V. Shaik Mohd. Rowther and Company, Madras - Appellant
Versus
K. S. Narayanan and Others - Respondent
Case No : Writ Appeals Nos. 401 and 402 of 1969
Decided On : 27 April 1971
Wages - Suspension - Interpretation of S.33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act
Fact of the Case:
The Labour Court held that the suspended workmen were not entitled to any wages under S.33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The court also found that one of the workmen was entitled to overtime wages for working beyond normal hours.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that due to the suspension being a punishment, the workmen were not entitled to wages. It also found that one workman was entitled to overtime wages for working beyond normal hours.
Issues: Entitlement to wages during suspension, entitlement to overtime wages
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted S.33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act to conclude that suspended workmen were not entitled to wages. It also considered the workman's overtime work in determining entitlement to overtime wages.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed in relation to the question of suspension and the claim of wages for the period of suspension. One appeal related to overtime wages was dismissed.
K. VEERASWAMI, C.J.
Per K. Veeraswami, C.JThe Labour Court rightly held, in our view, that in view of the suspension of the workmen as a punishment, they were not entitled to any wages and, therefore, no question of computation of the wages would arise under S.33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Ismail, J., thought that because to the suspension, that would not was raised by the management in its counter in relation to the suspension, that would not be a relevant matter. That question would have to be decided in an appropriate proceeding. In petitions under S. 33C(2) that question cannot be gone into. Once the Labour Court was informed and it was satisfied that there had been a punishment by way of suspension, no further question can arise, as, in view of the suspension, no claim could be made for wages.
2. So far as the overtime wages are concerned, the learned Judge has found that the workman in W.A. No. 402 of 1969 has worked beyond the normal working hours. That finding appears to be correct. In view of it, he will be entitled to overtime wages.
3. Both the appeals are allowed in so far as they related to the question of suspension and the claim of wages for the period of suspension. W.A. No. 402 of 1969, in so far as it related to overtime wages, does not succeed and is dismissed. No costs in either of the appeals.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.