##PAGE1##

1

2025:HHC:44888

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

CWP No. 3056 of 2016 a/w

CWP No. 504 of 2018

Date of decision: 19.12.2025.

________________________________________________________

1. CWP No. 3056 of 2016

Nova Security Services Private Ltd. & another

…..Petitioners

oVersus

Union of India & others ...Respondents

________________________________________________________

2. CWP No. 504 of 2018

Tata Global Beverages Ltd. …..Petitioners

Versus

H Union of India & others ...Respondents

________________________________________________________

Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice.

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1

________________________________________________________

CWP No. 3056 of 2016

1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 02:07:20 :::CIS

2

For the Petitioner: Ms. Kaushikey, Advocate for Mr.

Rahul Mahajan, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy

Solicitor Genera l of India, for

respondents Nfo. 1 & 2.

Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional

Advocate General, for

respondents No. 3 to 5.

________________________________________________________

CWP No. 504 of 2018

For the Respondoents: Ms. Rinki Kashmiri, Advocate, for

Mr. Janesh Gupta, Advocate.

Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy

Solicitor General of India, for

respondents No. 1 & 2.

Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional

g Advocate General, for

respondents No. 3 to 5.

H Mr. Anuj Gupta, Advocate, for

respondent No. 6.

G.S. Sandhawalia , Chief Justice (Oral)

Prayer in these writ petitions is to declare

Section 1 sub-Section (2) of the Payment of Bonus Act,

1965, as amended by Payment of Bonus Amendment

Act, 2015, (for short ‘the Act’) as invalid, void ab-initio

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 02:07:20 :::CIS

3

and violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of

India.

2. The primary contention in these writ

petitions is the retrospective nature of Notification

dated 31.12.2015, as the said Act was amended which

was to come into force right from 01.04.2014 and in

Section 2 of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 in clause

(13) for the woords “ten thousand rupees", the words

"twenty-onCe thousand rupees” were substituted and in

Section 12 of the Act, for the words “three thousand

and five hundred rupees” at both the places where they

occurred, the words “seven thousand rupees or the

minimum wage for the scheduled employment, as fixed

by the appropriate Government, whichever is higher"

were substituted.

3. It is not disputed that the challenge as such

was made in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 15379 of

2017, titled as M/s Magadh Sugar & Cenergy Ltd.

Vs. Union of India and others, filed before the High

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 02:07:20 :::CIS

4

Court of Judicature at Patna which was dismissed by the

Division Bench vide judgment dated 25.09.2025,

wherein it was held that retrospectiv e operation was

only for one financial year and the beneficial, welfare

legislation could not be termed to be unduly oppressive

or confiscatory.

4. On the laust date, we were informed that the

High Court of Moadras has also taken the similar view

and the leaCrned Counsel for the petitioners were asked

to verify whether any SLP was filed against the

aforesaid judgment passed by the High Court of

Judicature at Patna.

i 5. Today, we are informed that no such SLP has

been filed against the aforesaid judgment passed by

the High Court of Judicature at Patna and Madras. In

such circumstances, we are of the considered opinion

that we do not find any plausible reason to take a

different view.

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 02:07:20 :::CIS

5

6. Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed

in the above terms. Pending application(s), if any, also

stand disposed of.

(G.S. Sandhawalia)

Chief Justice.

December 19, 2025 (Satyen Vaidya

(hemlata) Judge.

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 02:07:20 :::CIS