REMINGTON RAND OF INDIA LTD. versus THE WORKMEN

Citation: [1970] 2 S.C.R. 935 · Decided: 17-10-1969 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.M. SHELAT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
REMINGTON RAND OF INDIA LTD. 
v. 
THE WORKMEN 
October 17, 1969 
935 
B 
[J.M. SHELAT, C. A. VAIDIALINGAM AND I. D. DUA, JJ.] 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
Industrial Dispute-Medical benefit-Company's Scheme for Calcutta 
employees whether applicable to Madras 
region-Gratuity-Qualifying 
period for workmen guilty of misconduct-Whether gratuity 
should be 
payable to workmen gu:lty of violence, riotous behaviour etc. 
An industrial dispute between the appellant company and its workmen 
relating inter alia, to bonus, medical benefits and gratuity was referred by 
the Staie Government of Madras on April 6, 1965 to the Industrial Tribu-
nal for adjudication. The Tribunal awarded bonus at 20% of the conso-
lidated wages as provided in the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. As to medi-
cal benefits the Tribunal directed that the company should pay the cost 
of medicines prescribed by the company's 
doctt>r and the full cost of 
hospitalisation when it was recommended by the company's doctor. The 
Tribunal modified the company's gratuity scheme in accordance with the 
workmen's demands. The company appealed to this Court against the 
award. The question of bonus had to be considered in the light of this 
Court's decision in la/an Trading Co~pany's case. 
On th~ question of 
nedical benefits the Court bad to consider whether the company's scheme 
lfo:r its Calcutta employees could be extended to Madras 
Region. 
In re~ 
gard to gratuity the main questions for consideration were as to the quali~ 
fying period for payment of gratuity to workmen who were guilty of 
misconduct, and whether gratuity should be payable to workmen whose 
misconduct consisted of violence, riotous behaviour etc. 
HELD: (i) In view of this Court's decision in Jcilan Trading Com-
pany's case the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 was not applicable in respect 
of the year in question and the bonus payable had to be calculated in 
accordance with the Full Bench Formulr. The award to that extent there-
'fore had to be set aside and remanded to the Tribunal for determining 
the bonus in accordance with the said Formula. [937 EJ 
la/an Trading Co. v. Mill Mazdoor Union, [1967] I S.C.R. 15, referred 
to. 
(ii) In the appellant company's earlier cases relating to its Bangalore, 
Hyderabad and Kerala· Branches. this Court had. ·held that the company's 
Calcutta scheme relatmg to medical benefit for its workmen was fair and 
reasonable and had made the said scheme applicable to these areas also. 
No substantial difference had been shown between these areas and the 
Madras region affecting the ques!ion of medical benefit. 
There was thus 
no legitim~te reason why the Calcutta scheme should not be applied to the 
workmen in the present case. [The Court framed an eight point scheme 
for medical benefit based oq the Calcutta scheme]. [939 A-940 CJ 
Remington Rand of India v. The Workmen, CA. Nos. 856/68 etc. dt. 
10-12-1968, applied. 
· 
(iii) Once the principle that gratuity is paid. to ensure good conduct 
throughout the penod that the workman serves hIS employer as laid down 
'936 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1970] 2 S.C,R. 
in Calcutta IT1&1UM£e Co. smno dislioctiM iil tU -matlor fll the qualifying 
period between cases of resignation and retirement on the one hand and 
dismissal for misconduct on the other becomes logically necessary. Such 
a distinction cannot legitill)alely he assailed as unreasonable. Similarly 
if the object underlying tho scheme of gratuity is to secure industrial 
harmony and satisfaction among w1>rlailen it is impossible to equate cases 
of death, physical inr•pacity, retirement and resignation with cases of 
termination of service incurred on account of misconduct. Besides. a 
longer qualifying period in the latter cases would ensure restraint against 
wilful use of violence and force, neglect etc. [94~ E] 
As laid down in Delhi Cloth .f< General Mllls case dmt acts ami>unting 
to misconduct as defined in the standing orders, when they are made, or 
the model standing orders, where they are applicable differ in degree of 
gravity, nature and th~r impact on the discipline and the working of the 
concern, and that though grave in their nature all of them may not result 
in loss capable of being calculated in terms of money. Amongst !hem 
there would be llOll!e which would forthwith disentitle the workman from 
Tetaining his employment and justifyina his dismilsal .. 
For the reasoos given in the Dalhl Cloth & G••tral Mills case It waa 
· necessary to modify the s

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.