ORIENTAL GAS COMPANY LIMITED Vs. THEIR WORKMEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals, by special leave, are directed against the award dated 22/07/1966 of the Fifth Industrial tribunal, West bengal, directing the appellant Company to pay two months wages or one- third of the available surplus, whichever is higher, as additional bonus for the years 1956-57, 1957-58 and 1958-59. The reference in respect of the year 1956-57 was made on 17/11/1958 and numbered as Case No. 226 of 1958. The reference in respect of the year 1957-58 was made on 23/07/1959 and numbered as Case No. 124 of 1959. Similarly, the reference in respect of the year 1958-59 was made on 25/08/1960 and numbered as case No. 421 of 1960. All the references ware dealt with together.

(2.) In consequence the questions that the tribunal had to consider were:

(3.) Though there is a common award for all the three years, as there were three references for three separate years' three appeals have been filed in respect of the directions given for each year. After the references were made by the State government, the Oriental Gas Company Act, 1960 received the assent of the President on 1/10/1960. According to the appellant, under the said Act, its undertaking had been acquired by the government and hence the liability to pay bonus, if any, in respect of the years, for which references had been made is that of the State government and not of the appellant, For this purpose the Company filed an application before the tribunal for impleading the State of West Bengal as a party to the proceedings. After issuing of notice to the State government, and after hearing the counsel for the State, the tribunal passed order on 16/07/1962 impleading the State government as a party. The State Government also filed in due course a written statement pleading that it has no liability whatsoever to meet the claim for bonus and that the payment if any will have to be made, according to the award, only by the appellant Company. The tribunal after hearing the contentions of the appellant and the State has held in the award itself that the bonus claim is to be met only by the Company and not by the State government. It is on the basis of this finding in the award that ultimately the appellant has been made liable to pay the additional bonus for the years in question. The appellant in these appeals has not impleaded the State government as a party and therefore, it is not necessary for this court to consider the correctness or otherwise of the findings recorded in the award that the government has no liability whatsoever in respect of the claim for bonus in these matters.