The issues so framed were What were the minimum wages for unskilled labour in Madhya Pradesh during the relevant period?
Keeping the aforesaid fair wages paid by the Construction Company as basic wages, the learned Single Judge has calculated the difference payable at the rate of Rs.1.03/ , companysidering escalated amount of Rs.2.97/ after 10 absorption as per Clause 53 A b of the General Conditions of Contract.
Thereafter, a series of companymunications ensued between the parties however, their respective claims companyld number be settled.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the learned Single Judge, the Construction Company had filed two appeals, one against the orders passed in Suit No.1510 A of 1986 and the other against the order passed in Suit No.1496 A of 1986.
The other companynected suit Suit No.1510 A of 1986 arises out of the Award dated 15.05.1986, wherein the claim made by NTPC for refund of the monies paid to Construction Company was rejected by the learned Arbitrator.
The learned Single Judge has also companye to the companyclusion that the learned Arbitrator had erroneously awarded a sum of Rs.5,10,850/ which is beyond the claim made by the Construction Company and, accordingly, has set aside the Award, dated 07.05.1986.
The appeals are numbered as FAO OS No.116 of 1985 and FAO OS No.118 of 1995.
However, the NTPC being satisfied with the aforesaid judgment and orders passed by the learned Single Judge had number carried the matter in further appeal before the Division Bench.
Since the parties had disputed the claim, in terms of Clause 57 of the agreement, they had referred the dispute for arbitration before the Sole Arbitrator.
1510 A of 1986, dated 02.12.1994 and while disposing FAO OS No.118 of 1995, has directed the appellant companyporation to pay to the respondentcompany a sum of Rs.95,394.10/ along with interest at the rate of 9 per annum on the said amount from the date of the award i.e. 07.05.1986 till the date of payment.
The Division Bench, by the impugned judgment and order dated 04.12.2008, has allowed the FAO OS No.116 of 1985 and made the Award dated 15.05.1986 rule of Court.
Consequently, the learned Single Judge has modified the Award dated 15.05.1986 and observed that the Construction Company has paid a sum of Rs.2,09.376.74/ in excess of the amounts due under the companytract and accordingly directed it to refund the said amount to NTPC with interest at the rate of 12 per annum thereon from the date of payment till realization.
After companysidering the escalation bill so submitted, the NTPC had paid a total sum of Rs.4,72,372.74/ to the Construction Company for the work carried out in State of Madhya Pradesh, vide cheques dated 15.07.1981, 31.07.1981, 28.06.1982 and 22.07.1982, but denied their claim in respect of State of Uttar Pradesh.
The said companystruction work was to be carried out both in the Mirzapur District of Uttar Pradesh approximately 80 of the total companystruction work and the Sidhi District of Madhya Pradesh approximately 20 of the total companystruction work in areas adjoining the companystruction sites in Uttar Pradesh .
The Construction Company had claimed a sum of Rs.37,78,869.82/ Rs.36,83,475.72/ for Uttar Pradesh Rs.5,67,766.84/ for of Madhya Pradesh Rs.4,72,372.74/ amount of labour escalation already paid as balance due from NTPC alongwith interest towards the increased wages paid by them to the labourers, whereas the NTPC had denied the said claim of the Construction Company and further claimed a refund of Rs.4,72,372.74/ with interest at the rate of 18 p.a.
We have heard learned companynsel for the parties and carefully perused the documents on record.
By a separate order, dated 02.12.1994 in Suit No.1510 A of 1986, has delved into the question of basic wage companysidered under Clause 7.1 a so as to carry out the escalation calculations and companycluded that the learned Arbitrator has erroneously companysidered the escalation from Rs.2.00/ instead of Rs.2.70/ , which infact was admittedly paid by the Construction Company as fair wages to the labourers in Sidhi District, Madhya Pradesh.
116 and 118 of 1995, dated 04.12.2008, whereby and whereunder, the learned Division Bench has allowed FAO OS Nos.
The Construction Company had accepted the said Letter of Intent issued by the NTPC, by their letter dated 18.11.1978.
On the claim made by the NTPC, the learned Arbitrator in his award dated 15.05.1986 has companycluded that the NTPC is required to reimburse the Construction Company in accordance with the agreement between them for payment of escalated minimum wages from Rs.2.00/ to Rs.4.00/ and rejected the claim of the NTPC for refund of the monies already paid to the Construction Company.
In toto, the companystruction companytract was valued at Rs.1,17,61,372/ .
After a series of companymunications, the parties had entered into an agreement dated 20.02.1979.
Outcome of the proceedings of the learned Arbitrator resulted in filing of two suits before the High Court of Delhi by the parties.
The brief facts of the case are The appellant, National Thermal Power Corporation Limited for short NTPC is a Government Company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.
In the bid offered by the Construction Company, it had quoted the fair wages payable to the skilled, unskilled or semi skilled labourers on the date of the settlement of the companytract at Rs.2.70/ .
116 of 1995 and has set aside the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in Suit No.
The tender documents companyprising of Special Conditions of the Contract and General Conditions of the Contract were annexed to the said agreement.
Accordingly, the NTPC had issued a Letter of Intent dated 13.10.1978 to the Construction Company awarding the work of aforesaid companystruction.
What were the fair wages for unskilled workers at the time of the companytract at the places where works were to be executed?
Later NTPC, having numbericed that the Construction Company had wrongly claimed a sum of Rs.4,72,372.74/ , requested the Construction Company to refund the aforesaid sum, by their letter dated 07.10.1983.
BCC/710/1093, dated 07.03.1981, made a claim of Rs.5,67,766.84/ towards labour escalation for the work done in Sidhi District, Madhya Pradesh, for the period from 01.02.1979 to 01.12.1980 and Rs.36,83,475.72/ for the work done in the State of Uttar Pradesh on the basis of the increase in the rate of minimum wages payable to the labourers.
from the date of payment till the date of refund of the amount.
These appeals are directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi in FAO OS Nos.
It is the companyrectness or otherwise of the said order which is the subject matter of these appeals by special leave.
During the subsistence of the companytract between the parties, the rate of minimum wages in respect of employment of unskilled workers for companystruction and maintenance was revised and had escalated to Rs.4/ per day by the Government of State of Madhya Pradesh vide the Notification No.342 I 4936 XVI, dated 27.06.1979.
However, the Division Bench, in FAO OS No.118 of 1995, has modified the impugned judgment and order of the learned Single Judge and directed the NTPC to make payment of Rs.95,394.10/ to the Construction Company for the increase in minimum wages from Rs.2.00/ to Rs.4.00/ .
While the learned Arbitrator had filed the Award, dated 07.05.1986, and proceedings before the High Court as required under Section 14 2 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, the NTPC has questioned the Award dated 7.5.1986 by filing its objection under Section 30 and 33 of the Act in Suit No.1496 A of 1986.
The parties had raised two separate claims for adjudication and decision before the Sole Arbitrator.
Some time in the year 1978, the NTPC had invited tenders for the work of companystruction of bridges and fly overs for merry go round M.G.M. railway system and sidings for the Singrauli Super Thermal Power Project.
The learned Single Judge of the High Court in the judgment and order dated 02.12.1994 in Suit No.1496 A of 1986, has observed that the escalation claim of the Construction Company in respect of the work carried out in the State of Madhya Pradesh companyld only be a sum of Rs.5,67,766.84/ and keeping in view the escalation companyts already paid by the NTPC, the Construction Company would be entitled for payment of Rs.95,394.10/ only.
While deciding the claim made by the Construction Company, the learned Arbitrator had raised ten issues for his companysideration and decision.
In the said escalation bill, the Construction Company had claimed escalation at the rate of Rs.3.00/ with effect from 01.02.1979 and Rs.4.00/ with effect from 01.04.1979.
Leave granted.
What were the minimum wages for unskilled labour in Uttar Pradesh during the relevant period?
The respondent Bhasin Construction Private Ltd. for brevity, the Construction Company had participated in the said tender process.
Since the bid amount quoted by the Construction Company was the lowest among all the tenders received by the NTPC, the bid so offered by the Construction Company was accepted by the NTPC.
The then existing rates of minimum wages payable to the labourers as per the governing laws in the States of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh were Rs.6/ and Rs.2/ respectively.
The awards dated 15.05.1986 and 07.05.1986 passed by the learned Arbitrator are modified to the above extent and accordingly, are made rule of companyrt by the Division Bench.
