The Labour Court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate bonus claims under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, as they are not covered by the Second Schedule of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

ORDER :

This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner workman aggrieved by an order dated 11.10.2022 passed in C.P.No.32 of 2020 on the file of the Court of Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Madurai.

2. In the said petition filed before the learned Labour Court, the petitioner claimed in totally an amount of Rs.4,17,000/- under different heads including the claim for payment of provident fund and gratuity to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- and Rs.58,875/- respectively. He also further made a claim for payment of bonus of Rs.2,00,000/- and an amount of Rs.7,000/- towards notice pay and an amount of Rs.55,000/- towards closure compensation and an amount of Rs.55,000/- towards leave salary. Out of the above said amounts, the learned Labour Court has granted only closure compensation of Rs.50,000/- with 6% interest. The rest of the claims were rejected by the learned Labour Court on the ground that the petitioner failed to place any material in support of his claim either by way of pleadings or by way of documentary evidence. Insofar as the claim with regard to the provident fund and gratuity are concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not contesting the same in the present Writ Petition and seeks liberty to make a claim before the appropriate authorities under the relevant enactments. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to examine the claim insofar as the payment of provident fund and gratuity and the petitioner is granted liberty to pursue the remedy otherwise available under law.

3. Insofar as the leave salary is concerned, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the respondent is ready to pay the amount of Rs.50,000/- towards leave salary as against the claim of Rs.55,000/- made by the petitioner. As already noted above, there is no material placed before the learned Labour Court in support of the claim made by the petitioner for an amount of Rs.55,000/- towards leave salary. Further, it is also not stated as to on what basis, the petitioner has arrived at the said sum of Rs.55,000/-. In view of the concession made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent offering to pay the amount of Rs.50,000/-, this Court is inclined to accept the same especially, in the absence of any supporting material placed by the petitioner for an amount of Rs.55,000/-. Hence, insofar as the claim for leave salary is concerned, no further adjudication needs to be made.

4. Similarly, as against the claim of notice pay of Rs.7,000/-, the learned counsel for the respondent has accepted to pay the said amount also without any contest. Then rest of the claim is for payment of bonus of Rs.1 lakh as claimed before the learned Labour Court. Before examining the matter on merits, it is necessary to see whether the learned Labour Court is competent to decide the entitlement of the petitioner for payment of bonus or not?.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent also strenuously contested the matter on the ground of jurisdiction of learned Labour Court to consider the aspect relating to payment of bonus under the provisions of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. As seen from the impugned order, the learned Labour Court refused to grant bonus in favour of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner failed to place appropriate material nor pleading in support of the claim made for payment of bonus to the tune of Rs.1 lakh. Even before this Court also no additional material is placed for consideration of this Court in support of the claim made for payment of bonus by the petitioner. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent placed reliance on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in H.P.State Electricity Board and Ors. Vs. Ranjeet Singh and Ors reported in (2008) 4 SCC 241 as well as the orders passed by this Court in The Management of Khilari Medical System Vs. The Presiding Officer and Ors reported in 2024 LLR 384 and Management of Ganesh Theatre Vs. Presid