LexATIC INDUSTRIES LTD. ETC. ETC. versus WORKMEN ETC. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
770 ATIC INDUSTRIES LTD. ETC. ETC. v. WORKMEN ETC. ETC. (Wilh Connec'.ied appeals) March 14, 1972 [C. A. VAIDIALINGAM AND I. D. DUA, JJ.] Indus.'Tial Dispute-Transport Allowance Award of Tribunal making ~mptoyers liable to pay 15 pa se per day to entployee who had to tr vel more than five mile!:.' to place of work-Awa. d ju~tified-Tribun1l when may take into account principles of social justice and region-cum-1 indust.~. The appellant companies cai'ried on the busine~s of manufac\!uring chemk:al in a vil:agr3. There were disputes bet\\-een the companLs and t.Uir workmen regarding dearness allowance, trans;iort al owance '3Dd other demands. In regard to transpdrt allowance the Tribunal in its award directed the employers to pay 1$ pabJ per day to workmen who lived more th'3.n five miles away from the place of work exo~:::>t on days when a workman was on leave. In doing so the Tribunal took into ac .. count the fact that in tl".e same region a pharmaceut'cal company was paying transport allow:.lnce to its workmen. The Tribunal rej.ec.ted the contention of the companie that it was not t1e ob igafon of· an em· ployer le provide transport facili cies for the wc:irkmen or to pay in whole or in part their transport expemes. In appeal by special leave, HELD : ( i) The principle that in " proper case the Industrial Tribu- nal can imp<Y.c new obligation on the employer in the interest of social justiee a'ld can also involve the parties in a new co.,tract has bee'l ac:. cepted by this Court. There can be no doubt that an Jndmtrial Tribti· .r h:i jurisdiction to make a propelr and reasonable order in an indJJs .. Jrial dispute. [779 F; 780 Bl (ii) Tu,, Tribunal was justified in having regard to the ]Jracti¢ ob· ta"1ing_ in the region on the principle of reg·on-cum industry when consi- dering the claim of the workmen for payme'1t of tra"'sport allowaice. Tb.e foundation of the princi.,Je of region·cum-industry is that as far as possible the1•! should be uniformity of conditions of service in com-oar- able concerns in the indu try in the region as that thefe is no :m'iaJance in the conditions of rr.rvice between workm·n in one 1!stablishment and those in the rest. The. danger otherwise would be migrafon of labour to 'he one wt.ere th"'re are more r~vonrable conditions from those where conditions are less favourable. (780 B-C; 781 A-Bl (iii) When tbe Tribunal w:is fixing the wage scales and d,.rne-s al· lowanCe it was aware that it had also to arljudi ~ate on a claim for .trans- port allowance. Havin~ reg?rd to this claim it m11st h'lve fixr>..d the W"g~ sc<1Jes anrt dearness allowance. Jn the scale of deafness allowance fiX·"d by the Tribunal complete neutralisation ha~ "Ot beeri. awarded. The Tri- bunal had also proceeded on the basis that the \VOrkmen must bear, from and out 'of the wages earned by them, a part of trans'"'IOrt exrr,nses. It w•< only when the Tribunal found th~t t~e ext>en<e ;ncurred bv the workmen for transport was rather high that it had afforded some lelief. A B c D E G AT!C INDUSTll!ES v. WORKMEN (V'aidialingam, J.) 771 A No material had been placed before this Court on behalf of the com· panies concerned to how that in the prepafat.on of the cos~ of l1v ng inOOx in the arf3. concjerned transport expense can be taken int a ... ,...... n . l/ol D-F; 777 GI (iv) In the circumstances of the case it could not be stated that I.le award of th.e sum of 15 paise per day was in any· man.ier tor ~aion .. ble 8 or arbitrary. The pay~nt had ':l!so beon hedipd in by the conJiiion ~. that the employer had to be satisfied that the workman was s:ay'ing at a piace five mile and over from the p'ace of work and that it n.i~d not be paid on days when the workman was either on earned leave or any type of leav~ authorised or- Otherwise. The Tri -iunal had also 'aken into account the financial capacity of the appellants and there was no flow in its reasoning. [782 F; 783 Al C Ahmedabad Mill Owners' Associa•ion e'c, v. The Tedfo Labour Association, [19661 I S.C.R. 382; The Patna Electric Supoiy Co. Lt1. Paino v. The Patna. Electrlc Supply Worker< Union, [19B] Supp'. 2, S.C.R. 761; Mohamed and Sons v. Their Workmen, [1968] 1 LL.I. 536, Remington Rand of Jnd'a ·Ltd. v. Workm•n, [1969] ( IY I F.L.R. 46 and The New Maneck Chowk Spinning/ and W•aving Co, Ltd. Ahmedabad and others v. The Textile Labour Association Ahmedabad, D f19611 3 S
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.