1973 (8) TMI 158
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... statements and produced their oral and documentary evidence. After examining the evidence; the Tribunal gave its award on September 26, 1969. All the referred points except a part of point No. 1 and point No. 7 were decided against the workmen. Point No. related to the categorisation of workmen in the factory. They were catagorised into four classes : (1) highly skilled workmen, (2) skilled workmen, (3) semi-skilled workmen, and (4) unskilled workmen. ,'The finding on point No. 7 is not impugned in this appeal. A part of point No. 1 relating to the fixation of grades and scales of pay was ,decided agains the, workmen. 'there is no appeal against this, part of the award by the workmen. The remaining part of point No. 1 relating to the fixation of the basic wage and dearness allowance was decided in favour of the workmen. The basic wage of the workmen was fixed in the, Following manner: (1) highly skilled workmenRs. 32/- per week (2) skilled workmen Rs. 23/- per week (3) semiskilled workmen Rs. 25/- per week (4) unskilled workmen Rs. 22 50 p per week. They were also given an increment of Rs. 10/- over the basic wage. The basic vage of other employees was fixed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....led and highly skilled wor- kers, I want to revise" the existing wages of clerks, drivers, durwan, Sweeper, laboratory assistants and overlookers. It may be observed that the first passage, quoted by us states only the conclusions. It does not give the supporting reasons. The second passage quoted by us states merely on,-- of the, reasons. The, other relevant reasons are not disclosed. The giving of reasons in support of their conclusions by judicial and quasi-judicial authorities when exercising initial jurisdiction is essential for various reasons. First, it is calcultated to prevent unconscious unfairness or arbitrariness in reaching the conclusions. The very search for reasons will put the authority on the alert and minimise the chances of unconscious infiltration of personal bias or unfairness in the conclusion. The authority will adduce reason- which will be regarded as fair and legitimate by a reasonable man and will discard irrelevant or extraneous considerations. Second, it is a well-known principle that justice should not only be done but should also appear to be done. Unreasoned conclusions may be just but they may not appear to be just to those who read them. Reasons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fair wage is thus related to the earning capacity and the workload. It must, however, be realised that "fair wage" is not "living wage" by which is meant a wage which is sufficient to provide not only the essentials above mentioned but a fair measure of frugal comfort with an ability to provide for old age and evil days. Fair wage lies between the minimum wage, which must be paid in any event, and the living wage, which is the goal." The referring order of the West Bengal Government does not ask the Tribunal to fix the bare minimum wage as explained in the aforesaid decision; nor do the pleadings of the two Unions set out a clear and unambiguous plea for the bare minimum wage. Paragraph 6 of the written statement filed by the Issac Holdens Mazdoor Union states that "the conditions of service for the workmen have been kept miserably low on the lines of the jute workers." Paragraph 8 says that the basic wages of workmen of all categories "are low." This, in our opinion, is not a clear and unequivocal plea for the bare minimum wage. Paragraphs 6 and 8 make a statement of the factual position regarding the condition of service including the basic wages in the factory at the time of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al scale of pay on the basis of skill. It is high time that some progress should be made towards payment of living wages to the workmen by introducing grades and scales of pay with annual increments." This would show that the Woolcombers Workers' Union was claiming a basic fair wage, and not the bare minimum wage.' Nowhere in this written statement there is a clear demand for the bare minimum wage. On the whole the two written statements, in our view, seek to claim a basic fair wage. The statement of N. H. Khan, P.W. 1 "that the wages are very inadequate for their subsistence" again is a characterisation of the rates of wages in the factory at the time of the reference. Those words cannot spell out a demand for bare minimum wage. Expatiating on the workmen's demand for--the basic Wages claimed in their statement, N; H. Khan later said that "when we, say that our demand for wages is need-based, I mean that. my. children will have adequate food and proper clothing and expens`s for education. I mean by that we want minimum wages." Our attention was also drawn by Mr. Sanghi to the statement of G. Ghorai to this effect : "I have 7 de- pendents. One of them is of school going....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ic fair wage. So when the Tribunal says in the aforesaid passage that the basic wages fixed by it "cannot be in any way fair wage" it does not really mean to say that it was fixing the bare minimum wage. It seems to us that the Tribunal really wanted to emphasise the fact that having regard to the financial capacity of the woolcombers it was not awarding more than the floor level of the fair wage to the workmen. So we do not agree with Shri Sanghi that the Tribunal has fixed the bare minimum wage. Now, the absence of reasons in support of the conclusions is indeed a serious flaw in the award. However, the award cannot be set aside simply on that score, if there is evidence on the record in support of the Tribunal's conclusion. Accordingly we have gone through the entire evidence on record. It is now well-settled that basic wage and dearness allowance should be determined in the light of the industry- cum-region formula and the financial condition of an employer. So the evidence win have to be examined in the light of these two principles. Industry-cum-region formula : For fixing basic wages and dearness allowance industrial adjudication sometimes leans on the industry par....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the Tribunal in the performance of jobs in the woolcombers and jute mills are not borne out by the evidence on record and that they are not material for the purpose of deciding whether jute mills are comparable concerns. it has come in the evidence of workmen that many of them work in conditions of "intense heat": and this is admitted also by the Woolcombers witness, B. B. Roy. One of the workmen's witness has stated that often workers faint on account of working in intense heat. Again, the evidence of the workmen also shows that many of them work in high powered light which causes very great strain on their eyes. B. B. Roy has also admitted that some of the workers work in very difficult conditions of dust. In short, the evidence shows that the work in the Woolcombers requires much more caution, precision and attention than the work in the jute mills. Naturally, the workers are put to much' more. mental and physical strain than the workers in the jute mills. B. B. Roy, Woolcombers, witness, has compared the job of certain workmen in the Woolcombers with the job of workmen in the jute mills. For instance, according to him Soap makers' job in the Woolcombers is similar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as merely commented that presumably this evidence had been led for the purpose of "impressing upon me that the basic wages and dearness allowance of those concerns are much higher 'than those enjoyed by the employees of the Woolcombers." Indeed the Tribunal could not rely on this oral evidence. The workmen did not specify in their written statement the names of the comparable concerns in. the region. Accordingly the Woolcombers could not have a reasonable opportunity of effective confrontation of, the workmen's witnesses. More importantly, it should be remembered that "in dealing with the comparable character of an industrial undertaking; the industrial adjudication does not usually rely on oral evidence alone. This question is considered in the light of material evidence and circumstances which are generally proved by documentary evidence. What is the, total capital invested by the concern, what is the extent of its business, what is the order of the profits made by the concern, what are the dividends paid, how many employees are employed by the concern what is its standing in the industry to which it belongs, these and other matters have. to be examined by industrial a....
TaxTMI