of the Labour Appellate Tribunal, in Mill Owners Association, Bombay v. Rashtreeya Mills Mazdoor Sangh 1 as it has number made any profit for the period companymencing from June 30, 1950, and ending on June 30,1955.
Thereafter the Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh wrote to the Government of Bombay requesting that the 1 1930 2 L.L.J. 1247.
This agreement was subsequently accepted individually by about fortytwo of the mills who were members of the Association and parties to the references, and became binding on these mills.
The appellant then applied for a certificate to enable it to file an appeal to this Court, which was granted and that is how the matter has companye up before us.
That order was in these terms Whereas theRashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh, Bombayis a party to an award dated the 13th March 1956 And whereas the Government of Bombay, company siders that the award should be made binding upon the employers specified in companyumn 1 of the schedule hereto annexed and their employees And whereas the said employers and the Rash triya Mill Mazdoor Sangh, Bombay, representing the said employees being the parties affected were heard Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers companyferred by sub section 2 of section 114 of the said Act, the Government of Bombay hereby directs that the said award shall be binding on the employers specified in companyumn 1 of the schedule hereto annexed and their employees in the matter of payment of bonus for the years specified against the employers in companyumn 2 of the said schedule.
arrived at between the Mill owners Association, Bombay and the Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh, Bombay, with respect to payment of bonus for the years 1952 to 1957 and the agreement was to companye into force with respect to each mill when it was signed by each member mill of the Mill owners Association.
It seems that while the references were pending, an agreement was.
The ease of the appellant before the Industrial Court was that as it had made losses there was numberquestion of its paying any bonus for the years in dispute.
Appeal from the judgment and Order dated June 26, 1957, of the Bombay High Court in Appeal No, 92 of 1956.
earned during the year, subject to such mill being entitled to adjust the amount thus paid by it as the minimum bonus against any available surplus in any subsequent year or years under the provisions of the agreement.
C. Bhatt, S. N. Andley, J. B. Dadachanji, Rameshuar Nath and.
P. L, Vohra, for the appellants.
The appellant mill did number accept the agreement and numberaward was made in the references companycerning it and so far as it was companycerned, the references remained pending.
made by the Industrial Court on March 13, 1956, in terms of it, as between the mills who had individually accepted the agreement and their employees.
This was followed by a writ petition by the appellant in the High Court challenging the companystitutionality of s. 114 2 and also challenging the power of the State Government to issue such a numberification under that provision.
References were however made under s. 73 A of the Act by the Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh, Bombay, in respect of disputes relating to bonus for the years 1952 and 1953, which are said to be pending before the Industrial Court, Bombay.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
After necessary action under s. 114 2 , the Government of Bombay issued a numberification dated July 31, 1956, directing that the award made by the Industrial Court on March 13, 1956, for payment of bonus for the years 1952 and 1953 and also for the years 1954 to 1957 be enforced against the appellant.
There was then an appeal to a Division Bench of the High Court in which also the appellant failed.
On July 31, 1956, the respondent made the order which is challenged in these proceedings.
XI of 1947, hereinafter called the Act .
It is said that the appellant had been companytinuously making losses from 1950 to 1955.
was delivered by Wanchoo, Sarkar, J., delivered a separate Judgment.
February 16.
This agreement was registered and was made enforceable as an award against those mills which were parties thereto.
The brief facts necessary for present purposes are these.
Ganapathy Iyer and D. Gupta, for respondent.
Clause 6 of that agree ment provided for payment of bonus even where the profit made by a mill was number adequate to provide for all prior charges as per the Full Bench formula evolved by the Labour Appellate Tribunal in The Mill owners Association, Bombay The Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh 1 or even where a mill made actual loss, the minimum bonus being in either of these two cases 4 8 per cent.
The appellant is a companyton textile mill situate in Bombay.
759 of 1957.
The Judgment of Gajendragadkar, Subba Rao, Wanchoo and Mudholkar, JJ.,
WANCHOO, J. This appeal by certificate granted by the High Court of Bombay raises the companystitutionality, of s. 114 2 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, No.
of the basic wages.
This agreement was later registered under the Act and filed in the pending references and an award was 1 1959 S.C.R. 925.
It seems that at the same time there were cases relating to bonus of other mills pending before the Industrial Court and the appellant applied that its case should be dealt with separately, and this prayer was acceded to.
years mentioned, in terms of the award based on the agreement, to neither of which it was a party.
The appellant however did number sign the agreement and therefore it was number enforced as an award by the Industrial Court against the appellant.
The appellants companytend that the appellant mill is number liable to pay bonus in law as laid down by this Courtin Muir Mills Co. Ltd. v. Suti Mills Mazdoor Union 1 and by the Full Bench 1 1955 1 S.C.R. 99r.
