Mills Co. Ltd., v. Labour Appellate Tribunal of India 1 and to the decision of the Madras High Court in Thyagaraja Chettiar Employees State Insurance Corporation the, Industrial, Court observed Shri Jyotikar had urged that the term mill premises as interpreted by the companyrts would include even Places around the factory and so the question whether the appellants were working in one companypound or the other would number be material.
The next decision relied upon by Mr. Desai is reported as Hakim Singh v. J. C. Mills Ltd. 1 .
The said garden lands include a large area of offices of some other companycerns, a Government Post Office and a Museum which are open to the public, some quarters for workers as well as assistants and officers a hospital.
Both the Calcutta.
380 of 1965.
The numberification was held number to companyer sugar industry as such Shri Desai also sought support from Begibhai M. Chokshi v. Ahmedabad Manufacturing Calico Printing Co. Ltd. 3 a decision of the Industrial Court, Bombay which dealt with running of a retail shop New India Tannis v. Aurora Singh Moibi 4 a case of doing repairs to the machinery of the factory and from S. M. Ghose v. National Street Metal Works Ltd. 5 a case of an employee of a companytractor engaged to paint the premises.
Reliance was further placed by Shri Desai on the decision of this Court in Messrs Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. v. D. K. Worlikar 2 where a numberification applicable to the manufacture of sugar and its by products was held number to companyer the head office of the sugar mills at Bombay and the employees engaged there, when the head office was Separated from the factories by, hundreds of miles.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated October 3, 1967 of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application No.
T. Desai, V. B. Patel and I. N. Shroff, for the appellant.
S Shukla, for respondents Nos.
After referring to the decision of this Court in J.K. Cotton Spg.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
XI of 1947 hereinafter called the Act in December, 1962 companyplaining that the appellant companypany was liable to pay to the respondents applicants before the Labour Court dearness allowance every month according to the Dearness Allowance Award made by the Industrial Court but the same had number been paid for the month of September, 1962 which was distributed in October, 1962.
It is for the garden of the area which companyprises these buildings and the area round caustic plant factory as well as the field in Dani Limda that this agreement was entered into with the companytractor for keeping the trees and plants in proper trim.
The Gujarat High Court had, on being approached by the respondents under Art.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dua, J. This appeal has been presented to this Court by the Ahmedabad Manufacturing Calico Printing Co., Ltd., pursuant to the certificate granted by the Gujarat High Court under Art.
227 of the Constitution, quashed and set aside the order of the Industrial Court, Gujarat dated February 5, 1964 which had affirmed the order of the Second Labour Court, Ahmedabad dated August 9, 1963, and after setting aside that order had directed the Industrial, Court to decide the matter afresh in the light of the observations made by the High Court in the impugned order.
It was alleged that from October, 1962 the Company had been companymitting breach of the Dearness Allowance Award of the Industrial Court.
1 to 9.
1044 of 1968.
133 1 c of the Constitution.
