WESTERN INDIA MATCH COMPANY LIMITED Vs. THEIR WORKMEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) X X X X

(2.) By a later amendment on December 4, 1961, the word "in" was substituted by the word " by".

(3.) Though a number of matter were raised in issue, both the parties rightly concentrated at the hearing on the question whether the sales office and the factory were independent units of production or formed integral parts of one and the same unit of industrial production. Whether or not an incentive scheme for better production should be introduced in any industry is essentially a matter for the management to decide. This position has been recognised by this Court in Titaghur Paper Mills Co., Ltd. v. Their Workmen, 1959 Supp (2) SCR 1012: (AIR 1959 SC 1095) and again in Burn and Co. v. Their Employees, 1960-3 SCR 423: (AIR 1960 SC 896). While in view of the importance of industrial adjudication not interfering with what is purely management functions, the Court felt that industrial adjudication should not impose an incentive bonus on the management for the first time, the court pointed out that the position would be different where an incentive bonus is already in force for the majority of the workmen. "We can see no reason", we said in Burn Company's case, 1960-3 SCR 423: (AIR 1960 SC 896) "why where an incentive bonus scheme is in force in a concern for the majority of its workmen, the Tribunal should not be able to extend the same to the remainder of the workmen." In view of this the appellant in this case tried to establish the fact that the sales office was entirely independent of the factory while the workmen, on the other hand, directed their efforts to showing that these are only two departments of the one and the same unit of production.