The Tribunal has also granted an allowance of 12 paise per day to the workmen, of Cynamid India Ltd., who were staying beyond three miles but less than five miles.
Madan G., Phadnis, Janardan Sharma and Indira jai Singh, for the appellants in C.A. No.
809 of 1968 .
In particular, regarding demand No.
K. Sen, V. B. Patel, I. N. Shroff and M. N. Shroff for the appellant, in C.A. No.
In addition to the bus service, there was also a train service which was available to the workmen.
2086 of, 1 968 challenging the various matters companyered by the Award Parts I and II, regarding wage scales, dearness allowance in so far as the Award was against them.
Once this claim was rejected on the ground that the employee are number entitled to be provided free transport, number, further question arose for companysideration before the Tripunal.
60 of 1966.
Appeal by special leave from the Award dated November 15, 1967 of the Industrial Tribunal, Gujarat in Reference I.T. No.
2086 of 1968 respondents in A. No.
742 of 1968 and respondent No.
1, 2, 3, 6 and By its Award, Part 11, dated November 15, 1967, the Tribunal disposed of demand Nos.
The decision of the Tribunal under its Award Parts 1 and 11 in respect of demand Nos.
4 they have claimed, in the appeal, that a higher allowance should have been granted by the Tribunal.
Both the companypanies were having their factories in village Atul.
It is seen that in respect of Cynamid India Ltd., which was in the same region, though in the pharmaceutical industry, the Tribunal had occasion to companysider a claim made by its workmen for free transport facilites or for payment of fixed transport allowance at the rate of Rs.
But this Court, by its order dated September 24, 1968 has restricted the Special Leave only to the question of transport allowance.
1 in C.A. No.
But in respect of the further claim for increasing the transport allowance, the Tribunal has ultimately increased the allowance from 15 paise to 37 paise per day to every employee who was staying at a distance of five miles and more from village Atul.
809 of 1968 Mr. M. C. Setalvad, 1earned companynsel for the appellant, apart from companytesting the grant of transport allowance to the employees on the ground that it is number the function of an employer to provide transport facilities or to pay allowance for the same, has raised an objection to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to give any such direction.
It was further pleaded that there is a good road from Bulsar to village Atul and the State Transport Service, which was running buses on the said route was easily available to all the workmen both for companying to village Atul and also for going back home.
Atic Industries Ltd. has filed Civil Appeal No.
1 to 4 and 7.
15/ per month.
1 in C.A. No.
The Union in, this companynection relied on the Award in the case of Cynamid India Ltd., which was a pharmaceutical industry in Atul region.
This demand was companysidered by the Tribunal in its Award published in State Gazette on September 3, 1906.
809 of 1968 .
Appeal by special leave from the Award dated October 16, 1967 of the, Industrial Tribunal, Gujarat in Reference T. No.
The Industrial Tribunal, by its Award Part 1, disposed, of demand Nos.
AND CIVIL APPEAL No.
N. Shroff for the appellant in C.A. No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
In respect of demand No.
Both the Companies opposed the demands of the workmen on the ground that it is number the function or duty of an employer to provide transport facilities for its workmen to companye to their place, of work.
C. Setalvad, V. B. Patel, I. N. Shroff,and M. N. Shroff, for respondent No.
The Companies further pleaded that most of the workmen employed in the two Companies were living in the nearby villages and they never depended upon either the bus service or the train service.
Therefore, the various other points raised by the workmen in their appeal numberlonger survive.
809 OF 1968.
Appeal by special leave from the Awards Part I II dated September 27, 1967 and November 15, 1967 of the Industrial Tribunal, Gujarat in Reference I.T. No.
While the Company in its appeal No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Vaidialingam, J. Civil Appeal Nos.
151/ per month.
65 of 1966,.
Demand No.
2086 of 1968 .
They manufacture dyes and chemical and other intermediates.
In Civil Appeal No.
20/ per month as Bus Allowance and those workmen who companye Cycling from places where S. T. Bus Service is number available shall be paid Rs.
Even at the time when the workmen took unemployment in the factories, they should have known that they will have to go to their place of work at their own expenses.
In support of its demand the Union had stated that the majority of the workmen employed in the two Companies companye from a distance of about five to ten miles.
2086 OF 1968.
742 and 2086 of 1968, by special leave, arise out of the decision regarding demand No.
15/per month as Cycle Allowance and also those workmen who companye by train shall be paid Rs.
Both Atic Industries Ltd. and Atul Products Ltd., are public limited companypanies.
10/ per month as Train Allowance.
In this award, a companyy of which has been placed before us, it is seen that the Tribunal has rejected the claim of the workmen for directing the Company companycerned to provide free transport.
742 of 1968.
The Tribunal directed this payment to be made with effect from January 1, 1968.
On all these grounds the claim of the workmen was resisted by both the Companies.
The Industrial Tribunal by its Award, Part 1, dated September 27, 1967 disposed of demands Nos.
The workmen have filed Civil Appeal No.
1 to 5 and 7 to 9 is, number the subject of companysidcration before us.
7 and 8.
4, the Tribunal directed the Company Atic Industries Ltd. to pay an allowance of 15 paise per day to every employee who stays at a distance of five miles or more from village Atul.
It is further seen that Cynamid India Ltd., was already paying 15 paise per day for every wrokmen who was staying five miles and more from village Atul.
5, 6, 8 and 9.
65 of 1966.
AND CIVIL APPEAL No.
742 of 1968 challenging the grant of this allowance to its workmen.
By its Award Part 11, dated October 16, 1967, the Tribunal disposed of demand Nos.
742 of 196 C. Setalvad, V. B Patel and I,.
The basis of the claim made by the workmen of both these Companies for payment of transport allowance and the defence raised by the two companycerns were substantially the same.
