Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        1984 (3) TMI 423 - SC - Indian Laws

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Factory employees' overtime rights expanded through Section 70 override, while supervisory-status findings determined maintainability. Section 70 of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act was construed to extend the Factories Act to all persons employed in and in connection with a ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
                          Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                              Factory employees' overtime rights expanded through Section 70 override, while supervisory-status findings determined maintainability.

                              Section 70 of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act was construed to extend the Factories Act to all persons employed in and in connection with a factory, so factory employees could claim overtime wages under section 59 even if they were not "workers" under the Factories Act. The non-obstante clause in section 70 was treated as overriding contrary exemption provisions in section 64 of the Factories Act and Rule 100, so those provisions could not defeat the overtime entitlement. On the evidence, the respondents other than Senior Supervisors and Supervisors were also treated as workmen for section 33C(2) purposes, and their claim was maintainable.




                              Issues: (i) Whether persons employed in a factory, though not "workers" within the meaning of the Factories Act, 1948, can claim overtime wages under section 59 of that Act by virtue of section 70 of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948. (ii) Whether the exemption machinery under section 64 of the Factories Act, 1948 and Rule 100 framed thereunder excludes such employees from the benefit of section 59 when read with section 70 of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948. (iii) Whether the respondents, except those found to be Senior Supervisors and Supervisors, were workmen entitled to maintain proceedings under section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

                              Issue (i): Whether persons employed in a factory, though not "workers" within the meaning of the Factories Act, 1948, can claim overtime wages under section 59 of that Act by virtue of section 70 of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948.

                              Analysis: Section 70 was construed as having two parts: it excludes the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act from a factory, and it simultaneously applies the Factories Act to all persons employed in and in connection with a factory. The non-obstante words were treated as enlarging the application of the Factories Act beyond persons who are technically "workers" under section 2(i). The prior binding construction of the same provision was followed.

                              Conclusion: Yes. Employees in a factory can claim overtime wages under section 59 through section 70 even if they are not "workers" under the Factories Act, 1948.

                              Issue (ii): Whether the exemption machinery under section 64 of the Factories Act, 1948 and Rule 100 framed thereunder excludes such employees from the benefit of section 59 when read with section 70 of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948.

                              Analysis: The non-obstante clause in section 70 was held to prevail over contrary provisions in the Factories Act itself, including the exemption provisions. The effect was that section 64 and Rule 100 could not be invoked to deny overtime wages to persons to whom section 70 made the Factories Act applicable. The suggested anomaly was treated as a matter for legislative correction, not judicial restriction.

                              Conclusion: No. Section 64 and Rule 100 do not displace the entitlement conferred by section 70 read with section 59.

                              Issue (iii): Whether the respondents, except those found to be Senior Supervisors and Supervisors, were workmen entitled to maintain proceedings under section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

                              Analysis: The finding on workman status rested on appreciation of evidence regarding duties and functions. The factual conclusion that the relevant respondents were industrial employees, except those in the supervisory categories, was upheld as one not warranting interference.

                              Conclusion: The finding of workman status was upheld for the eligible respondents, and the challenge to maintainability failed.

                              Final Conclusion: The employees were held entitled to overtime wages under the combined operation of section 59 of the Factories Act, 1948 and section 70 of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948, and the challenge to the maintainability and entitlement of the claim substantially failed.

                              Ratio Decidendi: Where section 70 of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948 applies the Factories Act to all persons employed in a factory notwithstanding anything contained in that Act, the non-obstante clause overrides the Act's internal exemption provisions and enables factory employees to claim overtime wages under section 59 even if they are not "workers" under the Factories Act, 1948.


                              Full Summary is available for active users!
                              Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                              Topics

                              ActsIncome Tax
                              No Records Found