LexM/S. NEW INDIA MOTORS (P) LTD. NEW DELHI versus K. T. MORRIS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
r960 Bharatkhand Textile Mfg. Co. Ltd. 350 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [Hl60) wage for each completed year of service for the period before the coming into force of the Employees' Pro- vident Funds Act, 1952, and half-a-month's basic wage for each completed year of service thereafter, v. subject to a maximum of fifteen months' basic wages Textile Labour to be paid to the employee or his heirs or executors or nominees as the case may be. This provision which Association Gajendragadkar ]. amounts to a departure from the Bombay scheme of r¢o March a2. gratuity brings out the fact that the provisions made by the Employees' Provident Funds Act have been duly taken into account by the industrial court. We are, therefore, satisfied that the scheme framed by the industrial court does not suffer from any infirmities as alleged by the appellants. The result is the appeal fails and is dismissed with costs. Appeal dismissed. M/S. NEW INDIA MOTORS (P) LTD. (P. B. NEW DELHI v. K. T. MORRIS G .. UENDRAGADKAR, K. N. W ANCHOO and K. c. DAS GUPTA, JJ.) Jndu,strial Dispute-";rv ork1nen concerned in such dispute," Meaning of-Industrial Disputes Act, r947 (r4 of r947), as amended by Act 36 of r956, ss. 33(r)(a), 33A. The respondent workman was dismissed by his employer, the appellant, pending adjudication of an:industrial dispute, and without the permission of the Industrial Tribunal, relating to the discharge of 7 other employees working as apprentices under (he appellant. The respondent raised a dispute before the Industrial Tribunal under s. 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, r947, and his case was that he was concerned in the dispute relating to the said 7 employees and gave evidence on their behalf and that his dismissal \Vas solely due to the interest he took in their cause. The Tribunal found in his favour and passed an award directing his reinstatement. The appellant contended that the respondent was incompetent to raise the dispute •:mder s. 33A of the Act. The question for decision, therefore, was one relating to the con- struction of s. 33(r)(a) of the Act: - ' A 3 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 351 Held, that the expression "workmen concerned in such dis- 1960 pute" occurring in s. 33(1)(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as amended, by Act 36 of 1956, includes not merely such M/s. New India workmen as are directly or immediately concerned with the dis- Motors (P) Ltd. pute, but also those on whose behalf the dispute is raised as well v. as those who, when the award is made, will be bound by it. K T. Morris Eastern Plywood Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Eastern Plywood Mfg. Workers' Union, (1952) L.A.C. 103 and Newtone Studios Ltd. v. Ethirajula (T.R.), (1958) I L.L.J. 63, approved. The New ]ehangir Vakil Mills Ltd., Bhavnagarv. N. L. Vyas & Others, A.LR. 1959 Born. 248, disapproved. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 124of1959. - Appeal by special leave from the Award dated February 8, 1957, of the Additional Industrial Tribunal, Delhi, in Misc. I. D. Case No. 422 of 1956. Jawala Prasad Chopra and J. K. Haranandani, for the appellants. 0. K. Daphtary, SolicitQr-General of India, H. J. Umrigar, M. K. Ramamurthi, V. A. Seyid Muhamad and M. R. ~rishna Pillai, for the respondent. 1960. March 22. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GAJENDRAGADKAR, J.-This appeal by special leave Gajendragadkar ]. is directed against the order passed by the Additional Industrial Tribunal, Delhi, directing the appellant, M/s. New India Motors Private Ltd., to reinstate its former employee, K. T. Morris, the respondent, in his original post as field service representativt"l and to pay him his back wages from the date of his dismissal till the date of his reinstatement. This award has been made on a complaint filed by the respondent against the appellant under s. 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act XIV of 1947 (hereinafter called the Act). It appears that before joining the appellant the respon~ dent was working with a firm in Calcutta; prior to that he was field service representative of M/s. Premier Automobiles Ltd., Bombay. The respondent joined the services of the appellant sometime in May 1954 as Works Manager. Before he joined the services of the appellant he had been told by the appellant by its letter dated March 27, 1954, that the appellant would be willing to pay him Rs. 350 per month and something more by way of certain percentage on
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.