Page 187 - DCOM207_LABOUR_LAWS

Labour Laws

Notes


Caselet The Bharatkhand Textile Mfg. Co. vs The Textile Labour
on 17 March, 1960

his was an appeal by certain textile mills of Ahmedabad against a scheme for gratuity
awarded by the Industrial Court. The Labour Association, the respondent, gave a
Tnotice of change under s. 42(2) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 (Bom.
XI of 1947), intimating the Mill Owners’ Association that they wanted a scheme for gratuity
and mentioned four categories of termination of service in the annexure. This demand
was refused and so referred to the Industrial Court under s. 73A of the Act. Pending the
reference the Employees’ Provident Funds Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), came into operation and
the Industrial Court, on an objection by the Mill Owners’ Association, held that it was
inadvisable to proceed with the reference and that a fresh application should be made, if
necessary, after the scheme envisaged by the Act is introduced.
A scheme for gratuity is by its nature an integrated scheme and covers all classes of
termination of service where gratuity benefit can be legitimately claimed and the refusal
of the Industrial Court in the earlier award amounted to a refusal to frame any scheme at
all. The statutory provident fund created by the Employees’ Provident Funds Act, 1952,
could be no bar to the respondent’s claim for a gratuity scheme although there can be no
doubt that in awarding such a scheme Industrial Courts must make due allowance for it.
Provisions of s. 17 of the said Act clearly indicate that the statutory benefits under the Act
are the minimum to which the employees are entitled and that they are no bar to additional
benefits claimed by the employees. Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. v. Their Workmen, [1960]
2 S.C.R. 32, referred to. It was not correct to say that the claim for gratuity was essentially
similar to a claim for profit bonus and must always be considered on unit wise basis.
The benefit of gratuity is in the nature of a retrial thus made was not accepted by the
Association, and so it was referred to the Industrial Court. Pending the reference the
Employees’ Provident Funds Act, 1952 (19 of 1952), came into operation on March 4,
1952, and it was urged before the Industrial Court on behalf of the Association that since
the statutory scheme of provident fund would soon become compulsory it would not be
advisable to adjudicate upon the respondent’s claim for the specified items of gratuity
at that stage. This argument was accepted by the Industrial Court; it held that when the
scheme envisaged by the new Act is introduced it would be possible to see from what date
it would be operative, and that, if after the introduction of the said scheme it be found that
a sufficient margin is left, it would then be open to the respondent and the Association to
make a fresh application for the institution of a gratuity fund either for all the employees
or for the benefit of such of them as will have to retire within the next few years. It was on
this ground that the demand made by the respondent was rejected on April.

The Act has been passed by the Bombay Legislature because it thought that “it was
expedient to provide for the regulation of the relations of employers and employees in
certain matters, to consolidate and amend the law relating to the settlement of industrial
disputes and to provide for certain other purposes” With this object the Act has made
elaborate provisions for the regulation of industrial relationships and for the speedy
disposal of industrial disputes. An “industrial dispute” under s. 3, sub-s. (17), means
“any dispute or difference between an employer and employer, or between employers
and employees, or between employees and employees and which is connected with any
industrial matter”. The expression “industrial matter has been inclusively defined in a very
wide sense approved Union“ in s. 3(2) means “a union on the approved list” “primary
union” under s. 3(28) means “a union for the time being registered as a primary union

Contd...

182 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY