on the 5th of july 1952 the appellant companypany made an application to the said tribu nal for permission to discharge the sixty nine employees.
six only.
on the 20th of august 1952 thirty six more temporary employees were put on the spare list and an application was made to the industrial tribunal bihar for including these thirty six persons also in the application which had been made for permission to discharge the temporary men thus all told the application related to one hundred and five temporary men.
the two applications which had been made to the industrial tribunal bihar the one under section 33 of the industrial disputes act and the other under section 33 a of the said act remained pending with the industrial tribunal till the 17th of december 1952 on which date the application under section 33 a filed by forty nine of the sixty nine temporary employees was dismissed.
the labour appellate tribunal gave its decision on the 25th september 1953 which is the decision under appeal.
right up to 5th july 1952 when we were informed that we were surplus.
on the 12th of july 1952 forty nine out of the said sixty nine employees made an application under section 33 a of the industrial disputes act to the chairman industrial tribunal bihar on the allegation that the appellant companypany had discharged sixty nine employees on the 5th july 1952 and had thereby companytravened section 33 of the industrial disputes act 1947.
though there were one hundred and five temporary employees originally with regard to whom an application had been made to the industrial tribunal bihar nine out of them voluntarily left the service of the company therefore the number of temporary employees regarding whom the application under section 22 of the act was made was ninety.
they said that in effect they were permanent employees and enjoyed all the benefits of permanent employees.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated september 25 1953 of the labour appellate tribunal of india calcutta in miscellaneous case number c 112 of 1953.
p. sinha r. patnaik and a. d. mathur for the respondents.
in fact the real reason for the proposed retrenchment is the petitioners desire to increase the rate of exploitation of its workmen by increasing the workload.
with regard to the terms embodied in the appointment form it was alleged that on or about the 3rd of december 1948 the employees of the appellant companypany were forced to go on strike on account of an industrial dispute towards the end of the strike the workmen became exhausted and drifted back to work.
some time prior to the 3rd of july 1952 sixty nine of these temporary employees were spared for being discharged.
referring to the directors report dated the 10th of july 1951 the tribunal came to the companyclusion that the workmens version that the erection works had been companypleted by the end of 1950 was supported by the said report.
it dismissed the application of the appellant.
k. daphtary solicitor general of india a. b. n. sinha and b. p. maheshwari for the appellant.
the cement plants started to work in full swing from about the first quarter of 1951 and we were working in the said cement plant producing cement from the very beginning.
the companypany had a number of temporary employees who were engaged temporarily in connection with certain erection works for the extension and enlargement of those factories.
it is significant to numbere that a large number of workmen who had worked on the job of erecting the cement plants were discharged shortly after the companypletion of the said work on the ground that they were surplus.
companypany on a finding which the tribunal expressed in the following words it is thus clear that these 96 workmen had been working in the production departments from as far back as the beginning of the year 1951 and so the companypletion of the erection work cannumber be put forward as the ground for their retrenchment.
they further stated.
two appeals were taken to the labour appellate tribunal one from the award made on the main adjudication and the other from the order made on the application under section 33 a of the industrial disputes act 1947.
a serious situation resulted from that incident and the companypany stopped the sixty nine temporary employees from companying to their factories or to their labour office and issued a numberice to them stating that the companypany were applying to the industrial tribunal for permission to terminate their services.
the erection work of the cement plants of the petitioners was companypleted towards the end of 1950 and it is therefore patently false to suggest that we became redundant as a result of the companypletion of the erection of the cement plants.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 144 of 1955.
the case of the appellant companypany was that the companypletion of the erection works for which these temporary men were originally employed was a gradual process and so far as the cement factory erection work was companycerned it was companypleted by the end of march 1952 except for certain minumber additions and alterations.
the appellant companypany have a number of factories at dalmianagar including a cement factory power house pulp mill paper factory chemical factory factory for the manufacture of certain acids and an asbestos cement factory.
on the 3rd of january 1953 the chairman of the industrial tribunal bihar intimated to the appellant companypany that the tribunal was numberlonger companypetent to pass any orders on the application under section 33 of the industrial disputes act 1947 as the adjudication proceedings on the main reference had already companycluded.
therefore the appellant companypany numberlonger required the services of the temporary employees and they were put on the spare list as and when their services were numberlonger required.
the names of these sixty nine employees were given in two lists appendix a and appendix b. it was alleged that on the 3rd of july 1952 a number of these employees headed by one brij nandan pandey entered the office of shri l. c. jain manager of the cement factory and brij nandan pandey assaulted the manager.
on the 4th of may 1953 the appellant the rohtas industries limited dalmianagar made an application to the said labour appellate tribunal under section 22 of the industrial disputes appellate tribunal act 1950 xlviii of 1950 hereinafter referred to as the act for permission to discharge ninety six temporary employees in the following circumstances.
the said terms stated inter alia that the company companyld discharge the employee at any time without numberice companypensation and giving any reason therefor whether on companypletion of the work on which the employee was engaged or earlier the terms also made it clear that whether the employee was on the same job or some other job in the same department or some other either on temporary work or permanent work he would remain a temporary employee until the works manager issued a written letter expressly making him a permanent employee.
the strike was ultimately called off and the appellant companypany taking full advantage of their victory compelled a section of the workmen who did number return to work until the strike was called off to sign the ap pointment form with the purpose of humiliating and terrorising them.
the relevant facts lie within a narrow companypass.
in other words the decision of the labour appellate tribunal was primarily based on the finding that the erection works were completed by the end of 1950 and therefore there was no ground for discharging the ninety six temporary men.
the application was made under section 33 of the industrial disputes act 1947.
october 11.
the terms of employment of these employees were embodied in a temporary appointment form which was signed by the employees as well as the management.
as and when the various erection works were companypleted the temporary employees were first put on a list of spare men and then discharged.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by k. das j. this is an appeal by special leave from a decision of the labour appellate tribunal calcutta dated the 25th september 1953.
the application was companytested by forty two of the temporary employees and in their affidavit they denied that any of the sixty nine workmen were originally recruited as temporary workmen and they further denied that they were involved in the incident relating to the assault on shri c. jain on the 3rd of july 1952.
at that time an industrial dispute relating to among other things the payment of bonus to the employees was pending adjudication in the companyrt of the industrial tribunal bihar.
