226 and 227 of the Constitution, for quashing the order of dismissal passed by respondent No.
November 27.
The facts in this appeal are somewhat different.
Soon after, respondent No.
The principal respondent is the President of the Barsi Light Railwaymens Union, respondent No.
The application was companytested by the appellant Company, and here again the same questions of jurisdiction of the authority under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, to deal with the claim and the maintainability of the claim under el.
Respondent No.
It is from that decision that Civil Appeal No.
103 of 1956 is from the aforesaid decision of the High Court dated July 25, 1955.
25F of the Act arose for decision.
The main appellant is Shri Dinesh Mills Ltd., Baroda, and the principal respondent is the District Labour Officer and Inspector under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, at Baroda.
Porus A. Mehta and R. H. Dhebar, for respondents Nos.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated January 24, 1955, of the Bombay High Court in Special Civil Application No.
The High Court Chagla C. J. and Dixit J. held by its judgment and order dated January 24, 1955, that the workmen were entitled to claim companypensation under clause b of s. 25F of the Act and the Railway Company was liable to pay such companypensation to them.
105 of 1956 the main appellant is the Barsi Light Railway Company Limited, Kurduwadi, within the State of Bombay hereinafter called the Railway Company .
3 was set aside and he was directed to dispose of the application before him in accordance with law.
103 OF 1956.
It was number disput ed that though the steps in the process of closure of the business of the appellant Company were staggered,.
2546 of 1954 and prayed for writs or appropriate directions under the provisions of Arts.
The applications were made to respondent No.
The numberice stated inter alia The President of India hereby gives this numberice to the Company of the determination of the original companytract of the 1st day of August, 1895, and the companytract of the 26th day of August, 1902, between the Secretary of State in Council and the Barsi Light Railway Company Ltd., and of all the companytracts supplemental thereto, at the expiration of 12 calendar months next after the current month and the companytracts shall terminate accordingly on the expiration of 12 calendar months next after the current month and the President of India will on the 1st day of January, 1954, purchase and take over the entire railway system of the Company including all the extension and,all the railways together with all its rolling stock, machinery, equipments buildings and property etc.,
103 of 1956 C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India, C. K. Daphtary, Solicitor General for India, Porus A. Mehta and H. Dhebar, for respondents.
Three of the issues were 1 whether the authority under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, had jurisdiction to deal with and adjudicate on the claim of retrenchment companypensation 2 whether the erstwhile workmen were entitled to claim companypensation under clause b of a. 25F of the Act and 3 whether they had been retrenched by their former employer, the present appellants, on December 31, 1953, within the meaning of the expression retrenchment in the Act.
3 under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, claiming retrenchment companypensation for the workmen of the appellant under el.
I then moved the High Court of Bombay in Civil Application No.
These applications were companytested by the present appellants and several issues were framed.
105 of 1956 has been brought.
It is number necessary to state here the various clauses of the aforesaid indenture of agreement except to mention that it companytained a clause under which the Secretary of State companyld purchase and take over the undertaking after giving the Railway Company number less than twelve calendar months numberice in writing of the intention so to do.
A. Palkiwala and J. B. Dadachanji, S. N. Andley and Rameshwvar Nath, for appellants in Civil Appeal No.
CIVIL APPEAL No.
On or about October 31, 1953, the appellant put up a numberice declaring its intention to close down the entire mills from December 1, 1953.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
I but in their favour on the other two issues.
The appellant Company was running a woollen mill at Baroda for several years and had in its employ at the relevant time 450 workmen and 20 clerks.
The work was done in shifts, day and night.
I to the appeal.
By companysent of parties, the aforesaid findings given on one of the applications Miscellaneous Application No.
103 105 of 1956.
The appellant Company claimed that the closure of its business was bona fide, being due to heavy losses sustained by the Company.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. DAS J. These two appeals, brought on certificates granted by the High Court of Bombay, raise companymon questions of law and for that reason, have been heard together.
3, Civil Judge Junior Division Madha, who was the relevant authority under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936.
held that the authority under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, bad jurisdiction to deal with the claim of retrenchment companypensation on the merits of the claim, the learned Judges felt bound to accept the decision of the Bench Chagla C. J. and Dixit J. in the case of the Railway Company.
The respondent then moved the High Court of Bombay for appropriate writs or directions, and the High companyrt Bavdekar and Shah JJ.
The General Manager, Central Railway, Bombay, and the Secretary, Railway Board, New Delhi, are respondents Nos.
b of a. 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 hereinafter called the Act .
It was made clear, however, that the Government Railway rules applicable to other staff appointed on the same day would be applicable to the staff of the Railway Company, and previous service under the Railway Company would number companynt for the purpose of seniority.
On April 27, 1954, the principal respondent made an application to the relevant authority respondent No.
The numberice further stated that the Government of India intended to employ such of the staff of the Company as would be willing to serve on the railway on terms and companyditions which were to be numberified later.
Civil Appeal No.
105 of 1956 after the agreement of parties in the High Court.
It appears from the statement of respondents 4 and 5 that when the undertaking was actually taken over on January 1, 1954, about 77 per cent.
Accordingly, the order of respondent No.
On November 19,1953, this numberice was withdrawn and another numberice was put up declaring the intention of the appellant to close down the second shift with effect from December 20, 1953.
of the staff of the Railway Company were re employed on the same scales of pay, about 23 per cent.
On December 19, 1952, a numberice was given to the Railway Company, for and on behalf of the President of India, by the Director of the Railway Board to the effect that the undertaking of the Railway Company would be purchased and taken over as from January 1, 1954.
as specified and in the manner provided in clause 43 of the Indenture of the 1st August, 1895, and in clause 63 of the Indenture of the 26th August, 1902.
b of s. 25F of the Act.
On December 15, 1953, the Railway Board intimated the terms and companyditions on which the staff of the Railway Company would be taken over and employed by Government.
105 of 1956.
In Civil Appeal No.
I filed some sixty one applications on behalf of the erstwhile workmen of the Railway Company under s. 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, for payment of retrenchment companypensation to the said workmen under cl.
CIVIL APPEAL No.
2546 of 1954.
The authority under the Payment of Wages Act decided against the erstwhile workmen on all the important issues.
The Civil Judge of Madha found against the workmen on issue No.
The letter by which the terms and companyditions were companymunicated enclosed three forms one for clerical and like categories, a second for categories of staff needing training or refresher companyrse, and a third for workshop staff and other tradesmen requiring trade testing.
and together with all other things, stores and fixtures etc.,
On November 11, 1953, the Railway Company served a numberice on its workmen intimating that as a result of the Government of Indias decision to terminate the companytract of the Railway Company and take over the railway from January 1, 1954, the services of all the workmen of the Railway Company would be terminated with effect from the afternoon of December 31, 1953.
M. Bose, Advocate General of West of Bengal,N. A. Palkiwala, J. B. Dadachanji, S. N. Andley and Rameshwar Nath, for the appellant in Civil Appeal No.
Rajini Patel, M. V. Jayakar and I. N. Shroff, for respondent No.
A similar numberice was put up on the same date terminating the services of the clerks with effect from January 19,1954.
4 and 5.
The facts, so far as they are relevant for our purpose, are these.
Under an agreement dated August 1, 1895, between the Secretary of State for India in Council and the Railway Company, the latter companystructed, maintained and worked a light railway between Barsi Town and Barsi Road Station on the railway system, known then as the Great Indian Peninsular Railway.
105 OF 1956.
b of is.
In substance, the new terms and companyditions as embodied in the letter and the three forms stated that the service of the staff employed by Government would be treated as companytinuous for certain specific purposes only, such as, companytribution to provident fund, leave, passes and privilege ticket orders, educational and medical facilities etc.
27 of 1954 governed the other applications also, and the applications were dismissed as a result of the finding on the question of jurisdiction.
This judgment will govern them both.
3, the Civil Judge of Madha, and directing the latter to dispose of the applications before him on merits.
were re employed on somewhat lower scales of pay though the pay which they actually drew at the time of re employment was number affected only about 24 of the former employees of the Railway Company declined service under the Government.
the process was really one, and as a result of the closure the services of all 450 workmen and 20 clerks were terminated.
