THE TATA OIL MILLS CO. LTD. versus K. V. GOPALAN AND ORS.

Citation: [1965] 3 S.C.R. 760 · Decided: 15-04-1965 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

THE TATA OIL MILLS CO. LTD. 
v. 
K. V. GOPALAN AND ORS. 
April 15, 1965 
[P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, CJ., K.N. WANCHOO, M. H!DAYATULLAH 
AND V. RAMASWAMI, JJ.] 
Kcrala Industrial Estabfohment (National and Festival Holidays) 
Act, 1958, ss. 3 and 11-Scope of. 
Under the Standing Orders of the appel!ant company, its emp-
loyees were entitled to five holidays with pay on specified dates 
during each year. Furthermore, by an agreement with the respon-
dents' union, the company had agreed to grant an additional day's 
holiday with pay, thus raising the total number of paid annual he-
lidays to six. In 1958 the Kerala Industrial Establishments (National 
and Festival Holidays) Act, 1958, was passed and s. 3 of the Act 
required evgry employer to declare holidays on every 26th January, 
15th August and 1st May, and to grant four additional festival holi-
days each year, on dates to be fixed by the Inspector after consult-
ing the employer and the employees. The number of paid holidays 
was thus statutorily fixed at 7. 
In 1962, the company obtained the Inspector's decision on the 
four .festival holidays and declared the dates on which such holidays 
would be given. At that time, while an industrial dispute between 
the company and its employees was pending, ·the respondents filed 
applications under s. 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, before 
the Tribunal. It was contended in these applications that the statu-
tory provision in s. 3 for 7 paid holidays did not override or abro- · 
gate the existing arrangement as to paid holidays and that the holi-
days to be given under s. 3 would be in addition, to the holidays 
which t\le appellamt was bound to give the respondents under exist-
ing arrangements; and that the appellant's attempt to limit the num-
ber of paid holidays to 7 during 1962 was contrar.v to the terms of emp-
loyment evidenced by the existing arrangement and therefore vio-
lative of s. 33. This contention was upheld by the Tribunal. 
In appeal to this Court, 
HELD: Under s. 3 the statutory requirement is 7 paid holidays 
each year. If under an existing anangement the employees were 
entitled to more than 7 paid holidays, such more favourable right 
was protected by s. 11. The scheme of s. 11 clearly shows that s. 3 
is not intended to prescribe a minimum number of paid holidays in 
addition to the exis.ting ones and, in the preseni case, would operate 
only to rai•e the total number nf holidays from 6 un<ler the exist-
ing arrangements to 7 paid holidays in accordance with s. 3. [764 B-E] 
Ov1L APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 150 and 
160of 1964. 
Appeals by special leave from the award dated September 20. 
1962, of the Industrial Tribunal. Ernakulam in Industrial Dispute 
Nos. 11 and JO of J 962 respectively. 
760 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
~'ATA MILLS ''· (lOl'ALAN (Gajendragadkar, C.J.) 
7Hl 
A 
G. B. Pai, J. B. Dadachanji. 0. C. Mathur and Ravinder 
Narain, for the appellant. 
M.R.K. Pillai, for the respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Gajendragadkar, C. J. The short question of Jaw which_ these 
·B 
two appeals raise for our decision relates to the constr~ctlon of 
ss. 3 and 11 of the Kerala Industrial Establishments (Nattonal all.d 
Festival Holidays) Act, 1958 (No. 47 of 1958) (hereisafter calle'1 th.e 
Act). That question arises in this way .. Two comJ.1>laints were tiled 
against the appellant, the Tata Oil Mills Company Ltd .• by the 
two groups of respondents, 
its 
workmen, 
resperu_vely 
under 
C s. 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act. These applications alleged 
that the management of the appellant had contravened the provi· 
sions of s. 33 of the said Act inasmuch as it had denied its emp-
loyees leave with wages on Founder's Day and Good Friday in 
1962. According to the respondents, they were entitled to have 
holidays with pay on the said two days under the terms and con-
D ditions of service, and so, they claimed that the Tribunal should 
direct the appellant to give its employees holidays under the said 
existing arrangement and should pass other appropriate orders for 
the payment of wages for the two holidays in question. The appel· 
!ant disputed the correctness of the respondents' contention. The 
Tribunal has rejected the appellant's plea and has declared that the 
E respondents are entitled to the privilege of paid holidays on Foun-
der's Day and Good Friday in 1962. It has also ordered that the 
appellant should pay the wages to the respondents for thos

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