LexTHE WORKMEN versus GREAVES COTTON & CO; LTD. & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D E F G H 373 THE WORKMEN v. GREAVES COTTON & CO; LTD. & ORS. August 24, 1971 [G. K. MITTER, C. A. VAIDIALINGAM AND P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, JJ.] Industrial Dispute-Workers in ruperrisory caparit_v getting less than Rs. 500! per rnensem-lf they could raise a dispute regardil!g wages which would take the salary beyond Rs. 5001- -When lvorkmen can raise a di.<?- pute about the terms of employment of non-workmen . • This Court, in appeal against the award of the Industrial Tribunal in disputes between the appeilants and the respondents, confirn1ed the v~:age scale anc1 dearness allowance fixed by the Industrial Tritnual for the cleri- cal and s.11bordinate staff, but set aside thr wage scale and dearness allow- . ance fixed for factory worknten and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for fresh fixation. When the matter was taken up by the Tribunal the \vorkmcn contended that the dispute regarding foren1en or supervisors \.\:as concluded by the judgment of this Court on the grounc1 that they were included in subordinate staff. The Tribunal, however, held that the super- visors were not workmen within the n1eaning of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, and hence the claim for revision of 'Vages and dearness allowanoe payable to them should be rejected. In appeal by special leave to this Court, on the questions : ( 1 ) Whether the case of supcr.;sors was remanded to the Tribunal for adjudi- cation; (2) whether it was open to the respondents to contend for the first time after remand that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to fix the wage scale and dearness allowance of supervisors; (3) Whether supervisors getting less than Rs, 500 /- per mensem on the date of reference could raise the dispute regarding wages which would take their ·salary beyond Rs. 500 per mensem; ( 4) Whether, if the supervisors were all non-work- men, the appellants could raise a dispute about their terms of employment and (5) whether in fact none of the supervisors was drawing less than Rs. 500 per mensem when the matter was taken up on remand and the Tribunal was, therefore, ri&ht in rejecting the appellant's claim for fixation of the wage scale and dearness allowance of supervisors. HELD : ( 1) The ju~.gment of this Court shows that the subordinate staff and factory workmen were treated separately. This Cotiif in remand- ing the case of the factory workmen had under contemplation all those workmen, \Vho on· the date of reference, were employed in a supervisory capacity and drawing less than Rs. 500. There is nothing in the remand order to warrant the submission that the case of supervisors was included in the category of subordinate staff, or, that it was not remanded. f.38 l C-D, F-Hl (2) It was open to both parties to raise all the contentions that were open to them, because, on remand the wage st~ucture of the factory v.•orkers, including basic wage and dearness allowance, had to be con- sidered afresh .. A reference to paragraphs 15 and 16 of the award, to which the special leave was confined. showed that both parties were pro- ceeding on the basis that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to deal with those supervisors who, under the Act, were workmen. [382 A-C] (3) The Tribunal had jurisdiction to consider revision of wages, dear- ness allowance and other emoluments so long as there is a category of 374 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1972] l S.C.R. workmen who though employed in a supervisory capacity, were drawing less than Rs. 500/-. Even if they ask for a pay structure which takes their salary beyond Rs. 500/- that by itself does not preclude the jurisdic- tion of the Tribunal to determine what is the proper wage structure for that class or category of workmen. Once a Tribunal is vestecl with the jurisdiction to entertain the dispute it does not cease to have that jurisdic- tion merely because the claim made goes beyond the wages which takes workmen out of that category and makes them non-workmen. What has to be seen is whether on date of reference there was any dispute in res- pect of workmen w.hich could be referred under the Act to the Tribunal. Therefore, supervisory staff drawing less thati Rs. 500/- per mensem can- not be debarred from claiming that they should draw more than Rs. 500/- presently that is, c.t the very co1nmence1nent of inquiry or at some future stage in their Sfn'ice. Th"' can only be deprived of the benefits if they are non-workmen at the time they seek
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.