LexM/S. MODI FOOD PRODUCTS CO. LIMITED versus SHRI FAQIR CHAND SHARMA & OTHERS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
1956 May8 560 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1956] M/s. MODI FOOD PRODUCTS CO. LIMITED v. SHRI FAQIR CHAND SHARMA & OTHERS. [JAGANNADHADAS, VENKATARAMA AYYAR and B. P. SINHA JJ.] Indu.trial Di•putea (Appellate Tribunal} Act, 1950, No. XL VIII of 1950-Ss. 28 a.nd 22(a)-Lay off during pendency of prior diwute-Application 11nder s. 28 alleging breach of s. 22(a)- Tribimal finding lay off justified-Application should be di•mi8Sed- Quantum of compensation pa11ablc-Whcn proviso (b) to s. 25·0, In· dustrial Dispute• Act applicable. During the pendency of an appeal before the Labour Appellate Tribunal in respect of a prior. industrial dispute between the same parties the management laid off certain workmen and offered to pay compensation equal to half the basic wages and dea.rness allowance for the first 45 days in accordance with the provisions of proviso (a) to s. 25-0, Industrial Disputes Act. The workmen made an applica- tion to the Tribunal under s.23 of the Industrial Disputes (Appellate Tribunal) Act, 1950 alleging that there was a breach of e. 22(a) of the same Act, and that the lay off was not bona fid• and claimed full wages for the entire period of the lay off as compensation. The Tribunal held that the lay off was justified but that the workmen were entitled to half the basic wages and dearness allowance not merely for the first 45 days but for the entire period under proviso (b) to s. 25·0. Held, that on the finding of the Tribunal that the lay off was justified the application under e. 23 was liable to be dismissed. Proviso (b) ·to s. 25-C, Industrial Disputes 4ct, is only appli· cable in case of a second and distinct Jay off and does not apply tc a period subsequent to the first 46 days of one continuous lay off. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 353of1955. On appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 22nd August 1955 of the Labour Appellate Tribunal of India at Lucknow in Misc. Case No. lll-C-650of1954. Veda Vyas, (8. K. Kapur and N. H. Hingorani, with him) for the appellant. - J. N. Bannerji, (P. C. Agarwalla, with him) for the respondent. • ; ... S.U.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 561 1956 1956. May 8. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by . M /s. Modi Food VENKATARAMA AYYAR J.-The appellant is a com- Products Co. A Limited pany registered under the Indian Companies ct, v. and owns a factory called Modi Oil Mills in the dis- Shri Faqir Chan,l trict of Meeru t. The responeen ts are workmen em- Sharma and others ployed in the Mills. The business of the Mills con- si'sts in the manufacture of o,ils and paints. On 12-7-1954 the management put up the following notice: "Notice is hereby given that due to non-availa- bility of groundnut seed and neem seed at the parity with the ruling prices of the groundnut oil and neem oil, the Management is reluctantly compelled to close the Groundnut Crushing Section and Neem Section till the next groundnut season and thus the workers in the attached list are surplus and their services are laid off with effect from 14th July, 1954. Workers, thus affected, shall be paid compensation according to Industrial Dispute~ (Amendment) Act, 1953, subject to conditions laid therein. It is further notified that the time of the attendance as provided in Section 25(D) and (E) shall be 10 a.m. for all the laid off workers". Pursuant to this notice, 142 workmen mentioned therein, being the respondents in this appeal, were laid off from the 14th July 1954. On 26-7-1954 the workmen acting through their Union sent a notice to the management demanding full wages for the period of lay off on the ground that it was unjusti- fied and illegal. The management denied these alle- gations, and refused the demand. This being an in- dustrial dispute as defined in section 2(k) of the In- dustrial Disputes Act XIV.of 1947, in the ordinary course, proceedings would have been taken with ref- erence thereto under the provisions of that Act. But there was at that time another industrial dispute between the parties pending final adjudication. That dispute had been referred under section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act for adjudication to the Regional Conciliation Officer, Meerut. He had pro- nounced his award, and against that, both the parties 562 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1956] 1955 had preferred appeals to the Labour Appellate Tri- M/s. Modi Food bunal, and they were pending at the date of the
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.