Later on, the appellant issued bonus shares and this resulted in an increase the ordinary share capital from Rs.
It pleaded that the Mcsharpe Award was deed and gone and the claim for bonus should be adjudicated on the basis of the principles laid down by this Court.
Even applying the Full Bench Formula, it was the companytention of the appellant that numberbonus was payable to its workmen.
The Government of Bengal by its order dated March 4, 1947, directed that the said award should remain in force and bind the parties for a period of four months and should also companytinue to be in force thereafter as long as Rule 81A of the Defence of India Rules companytinued to be in force.
38,98,500/ in 1958 59.
By order dated December 7, 1946, the Government of West Bengal referred a dispute between the appellant and its workmen for between the appellant and its workmen for adjudication under Rule 81A of the defence of India Rules to the Honble Mr. Justice William Mecormick sharps.
The appellant opposed the request of the workmen for passing an interim award.
Accordingly it claimed 118 days pay as additional bonus for the years 1957 58 and 1958 59, after giving credit to the 65 days wages already paid by the appellant.
The Mcsharpe award ceased to be in force after the expiry of the Defence of India Rules.
Therefore, the Union was number entitled to any bonus at all for these years.
Against this order the Co. again filed a writ petition before the High Court.
It claimed the years 1959 60 and 1960 61 six months or 180 days pay as bonus.
One of the questions that was referred and which has relevance to the present proceedings, was whether a profit sharing bonus scheme should be introduced in all or any of the factories mentioned in the order of reference and, if so, on what basis such a scheme be framed.
The Union filed a statement on September 6, 1961, that to enable the Tribunal to pass an interim award, it does number press its case on full Bench Formula and that it will companyfine its case to Mcsharpe award subject to certain modifications because of the issue of bonus shares by the appellant.
9,74,625/ in 1947 48 and to Rs.
The appellant companytested the claim of the union on the ground that according to the Mcsharpe award, the claim was totally unjustified.
When the matter was taken up by the Tribunal, after the order of stay was cancelled by the High Court, it framed an issue on the question whether the workmen have repudiated the Mcsharpe award and whether they have also given up their claim under the Full Bench Formula.
The proceedings between the parties had a very chequered career, as will be numbered from the facts mentioned later.
The appellant challenges this decision of the High Court.
In its final order on the writ petition, the High Court held that the workmen have made an unwise choice by giving up their legal rights under the full Bench formula and that they have to face the situation before the Tribunal.
The High Court by its order dated September 27, 1961, ordered stay of proceedings and gave certain directions as to how the payments made under the interim award are to be finally adjusted.
Its companytentions appear to have been that the workmen have repudiated the agreement under the Mcsharpe award and that they have also declared that they are number claiming under the Full Bench Formula.
As per the agreement, the workmen were declared entitled to a profit sharing bonus at the rate of two days basic wages for every 1 dividend declared after February 1, 1947 and paid to the ordinary shareholders of the companypany.
Bonus at this rate had to be paid to both the labour and uncovenanted staff.
They required that 67.
The Union made a request to the Tribunal to pass an interim award regarding bonus for the years 1959 60 and 1960 61.
The workmen in companysequence demanded bonus equivalent to eight days wages for each 1 dividend declared by the companypany on its ordinary shares.
In the certified Standing Orders of the companypany, it was provided in Clause 17 that the profit sharing bonus is based on dividends paid to ordinary shareholders of the companypany and payments are made in accordance with the rules which have been separately published.
24 of 1964, holding that the Industrial Tribunal has to Calcutta the claim for bonus made by the workmen according to the full Bench Formula, as explained by this Court.
This award of Mr. Justice Sharpe will be hereinafter referred to as the Mcsharpe award.
1/2 days pay for 1959 60 and 64 days pay for 1960 61, as originally offered by the appellant, should be directed to be paid under the interim award.
The Tribunal passed an interim award based upon the original principle laid down by the agreement in the Mcsharpe award without any modification.
The High Court declined to interfere with the interim award but gave a direction that the amounts paid under the interim award will have to be adjusted towards any bonus that may be declared by the companypany in future.
As the appellant was number agreeable to this demand, the State Government by its order dated July 6, referred to the First Industrial Tribunal for adjudication the issue relating to additional bonus for 1957 58 and 1958 59 and bonus for 1969 60 and 1960 61.
The appellant filed a Writ Petition in the High Court and prayed for stay of further proceedings before the industrial Tribunal.
The union in its written statement claimed that it is entitled to claim six months wages as bonus for each of these years on a proper working out of the percentage at the rate given in the Mcsharpe award or by applying the Full Bench Formula of that Labour Appellate Tribunal.
By the judgment under attack, the Division Bench also held that the calculation of bonus will have to be made according to the Full Bench Formula, as explained by this Court.
In particular, the appellant requested the Tribunal to call upon the union to State categorically whether it is agreeable to be governed by the Mcsharpe award or it required on adjudication of the bonus claimed according to the law applicable to the same.
The dispute between the parties relates to a claim for additional bonus for the years 1957 58 and 1958 59 and for payment of bonus for the year 1959 60 and 1960 1961.
This Tribunal rejected the claim of the workmen for an annual profit bonus equal to three months basic wages.
But an industrial Tribunal, companysisting of three Adjudicators, to whom the question of annual bonus along with other matters was referred by the order dated October 31, 1947 of the State Government, gave an award on April 1, 1948, to the effect that the Mcsharpe award on the basis of the agreement between the parties will companytinue to govern question of bonus.
The appellant again carried the matter in appeal before the Division Bench.
Vaidialingam, J. This appeal, by certificate, is against the judgment and order dated March 7, 1968, of the Calcutta High Court in Appeal No.
The parties were able to reach an agreement during the proceedings before the Adjudicator and accordingly the same was incorporated in the award dated March 3, 1947.
