1956 (10) TMI 39 - SC - Indian Laws

Supreme Court reinstates Banerji's award with pay modifications for Chatterjee.

Burn & Co., Calcutta Versus Their Employees (and connected appeal)

The Supreme Court set aside the Appellate Tribunal's order and restored Shri Banerji's award with modifications to the minimum pay and compensation for S. ... - Issues Involved:1. Revision of pay of clerical and sub-staff2. Grades of sarkars and checkers3. Bonus4. Reinstatement and/or compensation of four employeesDetailed Analysis:1. Revision of Pay of Clerical and Sub-Staff:The primary issue concerns the revision of the minimum wages for clerical and sub-staff. The background involves a series of disputes and awards dating back to 1946, including the Bengal Chamber of Commerce's scheme and subsequent awards by various tribunals. The Industrial Tribunal initially held there were no grounds for revising the pay scale, but the Labour Appellate Tribunal disagreed, raising the minimum pay to Rs. 65 per month. The Supreme Court found that the Appellate Tribunal erred in disregarding the previous award by Shri Palit, which had set the pay scales based on the cost of living index at 160 points. The Supreme Court adjusted the minimum pay to Rs. 65 per month, considering the cost of living index at 180 points, but did not find justification for raising the ceiling levels or starting pay for other categories of employees.2. Grades of Sarkars and Checkers:The second issue pertains to the grading and pay scales of sarkars and checkers. The Appellate Tribunal had raised their pay scales to match those of clerks, despite acknowledging that their work was not of the same nature. The Supreme Court found this inconsistent and restored the original pay scales set by Shri Banerji, noting no change in circumstances to justify a revision.3. Bonus:The third issue involves the claim for additional bonus by the Union. The Industrial Tribunal had simplified the company's bonus scheme, directing a bonus of one month's basic pay. The Appellate Tribunal awarded an additional month's bonus, but the Supreme Court overturned this, stating that the company's profits were insufficient to justify such a bonus for all employees. The Supreme Court emphasized that bonus distribution should be equitable among all employees and not just a section, thus restoring the original award by Shri Banerji.4. Reinstatement and/or Compensation of Four Employees:This issue concerns the reinstatement and compensation of four employees: S. N. Chatterjee, Ashimananda Banerjee, Panchanan Rana, and Joydeb Banerjee. The Supreme Court found that the Appellate Tribunal had overstepped its jurisdiction by modifying the Industrial Tribunal's order. Specifically:- S. N. Chatterjee: The Supreme Court upheld the compensation awarded by the Appellate Tribunal due to the company's failure to conduct a proper inquiry before dismissal.- Ashimananda Banerjee and Panchanan Rana: The Supreme Court found no grounds for reinstatement as their dismissals were due to prolonged absence without the possibility of a valid defense.- Joydeb Banerjee: The Supreme Court overturned the compensation awarded by the Appellate Tribunal, noting that the dismissal was justified due to his involvement in an assault on the Works Manager, and there was sufficient opportunity for him to explain his actions during subsequent conciliation proceedings.Conclusion:The Supreme Court allowed Civil Appeal No. 325 of 1955, setting aside the Appellate Tribunal's order and restoring Shri Banerji's award with modifications to the minimum pay and compensation for S. N. Chatterjee. Civil Appeal No. 174 of 1956 was dismissed with no order as to costs. The Union was directed to pay half the costs of the appellant throughout.