AMRITSAR RA YON & SILK MILLS versus THEIR WORKMEN

GAJENDRAGADKA.R, J.- This appeal arises out of an industrial dhpute between the appellant Amritsar Rayon & Silk Mills and its workmen. The· dispute originally related to seven demands made by the respondents against the appellant and these seven demands were referred by Punjab Government for industrial adjudication the Industrial Tribunal, Jullundur under section lO(l){d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 19'17. The Tribunal has made its a.ward in respect these demands. In the present appeal, which has been brought to this Court by special leave, are concerned with the award in so for as it deals with the respondents, claim for a gratuity scheme. The appellant urged that no case had been made out for the framing of a gratuity scheme. This plea hau been rejected by the Tribunal and a gratuity scheme has been framed. · It is the propriety and the validity of this scheme which are challenged before us by Mr, Kapoor on behalf of the appellant in this case.

p. 559

The scheme framed by the Tribunal reads thtis:- (1) In case of death of an employee while he is in the service of the concern on his becoming inca.pable of serving further due to physical or mental disability. One month's basic wages for each year of service.

p. 559

In case of death, the .gratuity will ;be payable to .the heirs or assigµs of the

p. 560

deceased workmen. (2) On termination of an employee's service ·by the concern .after he bas .put in five year's service -Half month's· basic wages

p. 560

for each year. of his service. (3) No gratuity would be payable to an emp· loyee who resigns•his job but if he has served for fifteen years continuously and is rendered unfit to serve further by old • age or protarcted ill •health, be shall be given gratuity calculated at the rate of onti month's ·basic wages for each comp·

p. 560

leted year of bis service. (4) No gratuity would be payable to an emp-

p. 560

loyee who is dismissed· for misconduct.

p. 560

In rejecting the appellant's contention that no scheme should be framed, the Tribunal has found that the appellant which was started in 1934 is the biggest Textile Mills in Amritsar and its career so far has been one of success all along the line. The invested capital of the concern is Rs.14 'lakhs and its working capital is Rs.2,70,000/-. On its roll r.re employed 1,250 employees whose monthly wage bill comes to Rs.1,20,000/-. It is admitted that the appellant ha.s been paying bonus to its workmen since 1946 and has allowed dividend on invested capital. It contributes to the Provident Fund and the Employees·State Insurance Scheme. Having regard to· this ·financial position of the appellant, the · Tribunal has held, and we think rightly, that the appellant cannot successfully resist the demand for the framing of a gratuity scheme.

p. 560

Mr. Kapoor, however, contends that even if a gratuit;r scheme has to be framed, the Tribuna.l was in error~ not placing a.ny ceiling on the amount of ,gratuity payable to the employees. In our opinion, this contention is well-founded. Speaking generally, where there is no provision for superannuation and gratuity is paid at a fairly reasonable rate, gratuity schemes framed by Industrial Tribunals generally provide for a ceiling, and so, we do not see how --the Tribunal was justified in departing from this generally accepted position ... The rate fixed in the present case is not unduly low and admittedly, there is no provision for superannuation. Therefore we think that the appellant is justified in contending that a ceiling should be put on the amount of gratuity payable under th~ scheme. On the whole, we think it would be reas· . onable if the maximum amount of gratuity payable under the scheme is fixed at 15 months' basic wages. We ougl:t to make it clear that in coming to this conclusion we do not propose to lay down any hard and fast rule that a ceiling must be placed in every case and that it should be of the order of 15 months' basic wages; as we have repeatedly observed, in framing gratuity scheme, all relevant factors have to be taken into account and so, inevitably the schemes are likely to differ from case to case.

pp. 560–561

Mr. Kapoor then contends that one month's basic wages which has been provided for by clauses (1) and (3) is excessive and it should be reduced to 15 days' basic wages. This argument fa that the usual pattern of gratuity schemes in the Punjab shows that it is 15 days' basic wages which' is provided under similar clauses. In suport of his argument, Mr. Kapoor has referred us to some of the awards produced by him. In the gratuity scheme framed in the New India Embroidery Mills, Ohheharta, 15 days' wages has been adopted as the basis, but this award includes dearness allowance cand so,,this provision is.not very helpful because in the present Calle, the rate has been fixed by reference to the basic wages alone.• The scheme framed in the Niemla Textile Finishing Mills, Chheharta, is on the eame lines as the scheme under the New India Embroidery Mills and the same comment, therefore, falls to be made about it. The gratuity scheme in the Technological Institute of Textiles, Bhiwani, h!\s adopted the basis of 1/2 month's basic wages for each completed year of service, but t,here is no ceiling placed by the scheme. Ou the other haud, the gratuity scheme in the Shambhu Nath & Sons Ltd,, Amritsar, adopts one month's basic wages for each completed year of service and so does the scheme in the India Woollen Textile Mills, Chheharta, and the India Calico Printing Mills. The Jagatjit Cotton Textile Mills ·Ltd,, l'hagwara, has 1/2 month's basic wa;,es; the Punjab Distilling Industries Ltd, provides for one month's basic wages; so does the. New Egerton Woollen Mill, DhariwaL The Jawala Flour Mills Amritsar, provides for th<l rate of J /2 month's basic wages iu case of workmen with five years of service and in case of workmen with service above five years at the rate of one month's basic wages. It would thus !Je seen th>Lt he claim made by the appellant that the pattern of gratuity schemes in the Punjab invariably· shows the adoption of the rate of 15 days' basic wages for. each completed year of service, is not supported by the several awards produced by the parties before us, and so, it cannot be said that the present award has departed from any fixed uniform pattern in the matter.

pp. 561–562

Mr. Kapoor then referred to the decision of this Oourt in Bharatkhand Textile Mfg. Co, Ltd. v. The Textile Labour Association Ahmedabad ( ') where the gratuity scheme provided, inter alia, for one month's basic wages for each completed year of service for . the period before the coming into force of the Employees Provident Funds Act, 1952, and h,alf a month's basic wages for each completed year of service thereafter, subject to a maximum of 15 month's basie wages. Tliis shows that the award with which this Court was dealing in that case had ma.de a distinction between gratuity sohemeA prior to 1952 and those subsequent to it, and this distinction was based on the fact that the Employees' Provident Funds Act had come into force in 1952. Therefore, we do not, think it would be fair to suggest that becauRe the scheme thus framed wrts accepted by this Court in appea.1 it follows that this Court has laid down that in every case half a month's basic wages should be pa.id after 1952.

pp. 562–563

Mr. Kapoor has also relied on thf' decision of the Industrial Tril•unal at Rajkot in Arvind Mills Oo-operati?Je Supply Societv Ltd., 4hmedabad v. Their Workmen(1). The scheme framed by the Tribunal in this case no doubt provides for 15 day's ba11ic wages as centended by Mr. Kapoor and prescribes the ceiling of 10 months's basic wages .. Simifarly. in the Rashtriya Mill Majdoor Sangh, Bombuy. v. Millowners' Association, Bambay ( the gratuity schemes framed appears to be substantially Aimilar to the one framed in the Bharatkhand Te:ctile Mfq. Oo. Ltd.('). These decisions merely show that 15 days basic wages has been adopted as a rate by some of the gratuity schemes framed by Industrial Tribunals. We W•)uld, however, not be prepared to accept. Mr. Kapoor's contention that these decisions support the general argument that invariably the rate of 15 days' basic wages must be adopted. That is a question which has to be decided by the Tribunal on the facts of each case; and though it may be desirable that gratuity schemes framed in the same industry in the same region should not disclose radical or violent differences, it' would not be possible to introduce uniformity by accepting the argument that 15 days

p. 563

s s. a. .. ·should· be treated as the invariable rate in' the· gratuity schemes. On the inatetial adduced before us, we are not preparetl ·to hold that the adoptPd by the award under appeal ·has either a violent or radical departure fromlthe pattern prevailing in the same industry ''unjab or is otherwise unjustified on the The fact that we decline to interfere with the prescribed by the award under appeal does not mean that according to us, that rate should be adopted in other cases without reference relevant facts in each tlf them.

pp. 563–564

The result is, the awar<l is modified by cribing a ceiling of 15 month's basic wages. rest of the award is confirmed. There would no order as to costs.

p. 564

ABINASH CHANDRA BOSE

p. 564

v.

p. 564

BIMAL CHANDRA BOSE (B. P. C, J., K. N. and

p. 564

J. c. JJ.)

p. 564

Criminal Breach of Trust- Prosecution of lawyer by Hand-writing expert neither called nor examined-Acquittal trial Magistrale-Retrial and examination of expqr/ directtrl by High Court on appeal~Propriety.

p. 564

The of

p. 564

by

p. 564

of the Indian misappro·

p. 564

mm.of that The on written appellant that of the of had This

p. 564