27 of 1952 in addition to the minimum wages fixed in the Government numberification dated the 11th March, 1952.
When Appeal No.
It is clear, therefore, that the employers were, before the 11th March, 1952, when the minimum wages were fixed by the Government of Assam, under a legal obligation to pay cash companypensation to the workmen for the reduction in the rice quota.
by the award of the Industrial Tribunal dated the 11th December, 1951.
352/51/56 dated the 11th March 1952.
It also fixed the rate of companypensation for the rice cut.
There is numberdoubt that the employers used to provide 5 seers of rice to an adult male worker at companycession rates before February, 1950.
The workmen on the other hand claimed that they should companytinue to get the cash companypensation that was hitherto paid to them for the reduction in rice ration companysequent on the introduction of All India Ration Scale over and above the minimum wages basic wages and dearness allowance that had been determined and numberified by the Government.
This was the companycession which was being enjoyed by the workmen in respect of the supply of foodstuffs when the minimum wages were fixed by the numberification dated the 11th March, 1952.
On the 27th May, 1954, the employers who are the appellants before us obtained from this Court Special Leave to Appeal against the award of the Labour Appellate Tribunal.
Under the terms of that numberification, the Government of Assam fixed the minimum wages which were to companye into force with effect from the 30th March 1952, companysisting of basic wages and dearness allowance at the rates specified in the Schedule annexed thereto.
When later on the 18th November, 1950, the Government, by the numberification issued the Food Control Order, fixed the rice quota of the workmen on an All India Ration Scale at 3 1/2 seers of rice per week, there was a further cut of another seer of rice per week and the cash companypensation payable by the employers to the workmen was increased and fixed at 8 as.
14 of 1950.
A dispute thus arose between the employers and the workmen and the Government of Assam referred the said dispute in the following terms for adjudication by the Industrial Tribunal, Assam, viz.,
The employers companytended in the alternative that even if they were under an obligation to pay cash companypensation, the amount would be far less than the amount claimed by the workmen.
The result was a further cut of another seer of rice per week in the supply of rice at companycession rates.
Paragraph 2 of the said numberification is important and it runs as follows The rates are exclusive of companycessions enjoyed by the workers in respect of supplies of foodstuffs and other essential companymodities and other amenities which will companytinue unaffected.
14 of 1950, which was the subject matter of Appeal No.
The employers on the other hand companytended that whatever companycessions had been given to their workmen in respect of the sale price of rice were ex gratia and therefore the workmen had numberlegal claim for companypensation in respect of the quantity of the cut in rice ration so imposed.
Whether this cash companypensation was a companycession enjoyed by the workmen in respect of the supply of foodstuffs or had been translated into an amenity as held by the Labour Appellate Tribunal in its award under appeal before us, it was saved by paragraph 2 of the numberification and if the matters had stood thus, there companyld be numberjustification for the argument which was strenuously urged before us that the cash companypensation had merged in the minimum wages fixed by the Government.
It accordingly held that after the 30th March 1952, when the minimum wages as fixed by that numberification came into effect, the employers were number under an obligation to pay companypensation for the rice cut as awarded by it in its previous award made in Reference No.
When that quantum of 5 seers of rice was reduced after February, 1950, by half a seer per week, the employers paid to their workmen cash companypensation for that cut in the rice ration at the rate of 6 pies per working day.
This led to a dispute between the employers and the workmen and that dispute was referred for adjudication by the Government of Assam by its numberification dated the 30th October 1950.
Before February 1950, the supply of rice at such companycession rates to an adult male worker was 5 seers per week.
The Industrial Tribunal had already made its award in regard thereto on the 11th December, 1951, which was published in the Assam Gazette on the 2nd February, 1952, and this position was well within the knowledge of the Government of Assam when it published its numberification dated the 11th March, 1952, after companysidering the Report of the Minimum Wages Committee.
In that adjudication proceeding which was numbered as reference No.
Due to shortage of cereals, the Government of India numberified on the 18th November 1950, an All India Cereal Ration Scale which laid down that numberadult male worker was entitled to get more than 3 1/2 seers of rice per week.
It upheld the companytention of the employers that the companypensation for the rice cut had been merged in the minimum wages as fixed by the Government.
This award was pronounced by the Labour Appellate Tribunal on the 2nd April 1954.
They only questioned the rate of companypensation which had been awarded.
27 of 1952, held that the companypensation for the rice cut had, at the time of the numberification dated the 11th March, 1952, become an amenity, that the Government number only fixed the basic wages and dearness allowance but by paragraph 2 of the said numberification also preserved all the amenities which the workmen were enjoying or to which they were entitled and that the workmen of the Tea Gardens of Assam would be entitled to cash companypensation for the rice cut as long as the cut remained in force but at the rate which was fixed by them in their award made in Appeal No.
The only question which arises for companysideration before us is whether the cash companypensation for the rice cut which was being paid by the employers to the workmen before the 11th March, 1952, was merged in the minimum wages fixed by the Government as per numberification of the said date or was saved by paragraph 2 of the same numberification being a companycession enjoyed by workers in respect of supply of foodstuffs and other essential companymodities or an amenity.
It held that the system of rice benefit at companycession rate was a part of the workers wage and the employers were under a legal obligation to pay cash companypensation to the workmen for the said cut in the supply of rice.
At the hearing of that appeal, the employers did number reiterate their companytention that they were under numberlegal obligation to pay cash companypensation for the rice cut.
The existing tasks and ours of work may companytinue until further orders.
The Tribunal gave its award on the 11th December, 1951, which was published in the Assam Gazette on the 2nd February, 1952.
In the meanwhile, on the 11th March 1952, the Government of Assam issued a numberification in exercise of the powers companyferred on it by the Minimum Wages Act and fixed the minimum wages of workmen employed in the Tea Gardens of Assam at certain cash rates.
The workmen claimed companypensation in cash for this cut in the rice quota.
The Tribunal made its award on the 26th July 1952, which was published in the Assam Gazette on the 6th August 1952.
The labour Appellate Tribunal by its award dated the 2nd April 1954, which was published simultaneously with its award in Appeal No.
The employers filed an appeal being Appeal No.
The employers therefore companytended that the Governments minimum wage numberification had the effect of absorbing their cash companypensation in the cash minimum wage that had been determined and that they were under numberobligation to pay after the date of this numberification the companypensation for the rice cut over and above the minimum wages fixed by the Government.
27 of 1952.
27 of 1952 before the Labour Appellate Tribunal.
Whether on account of the reduction in cereal ration companysequent on the introduction of All India Ration Scale the workmen employed in the Tea plantations in Assam are entitled to cash companypensation as a Part of the existing companycessions over and above the minimum wages notified in Government Notification No.
The companytention of the employers was accepted and the rate of companypensation for the rice cut was reduced.
The workmen preferred an appeal against this award before the Labour Appellate Tribunal.
Even though the employers had companytended before the Industrial Tribunal that the companycession which had been given to the workmen in respect of the sale price of rice was ex gratia and the workmen had numberlegal claim thereto, that companytention was negatived by the Industrial Tribunal and it was held that the employers were under a legal obligation to pay cash companypensation to the workmen for the said cut in the supply of rice.
27/52 taken by the employers before the Labour Appellate Tribunal was heard, the employers did number reiterate their companytention that they were under numberlegal obligation to pay cash companypensation for the rice cut and the finding of the Industrial Tribunal that the workmen had a legal right to get cash companypensation for the reduction in the rice quota remained unchallenged.
It appears that the minimum wages so fixed exceeded the total of the cash wages which the employers were paying to their workmen and the value of the companycession at which rice was being supplied as also the amount of companypensation for the cut which they were directed to pay by the award made in Reference No.
14 of 1950, the workmen claimed cash companypensation at a certain rate.
The appellant, the management of the Tea Estates in Assam represented by the Indian Tea Association, Calcutta, used to supply certain quantities of rice and other articles of food at companycession rates to their workmen.
Bhagwati, J. The facts and circumstances which led to the present Appeal may be shortly stated as under.
