ASPINWALL AND COMPANY KULSHEKAR MANGALORE Vs. LALITHAPADUGADY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These five civil appeals bearing numbers 4086 to 4090 of 1986 would be disposed of by a common order since the question of law raised in these is common.

(2.) In each case, there is a workman arrayed as respondent. Undisputable that workman was employed in a seasonal establishment of the employer-appellant. The activity of the establishment is curing Coffee. The industry involved has been declared seasonal under Section 25-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. In each calendar year the factory remains closed from the month of June to the month of September. The establishment as a consequence is in operation from September onward till June in the year following. The claim of each workman before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 was that he had a right to have his gratuity computed at the rate of 7 days' wages for two seasons in each calendar year on the basis that the calendar year is a unit and the period of work stood split into two seasons. Support for the claim was sought from the fact that the establishment maintained its accounting year from January 1 to December 31 and so, it was claimed, computation of gratuity has to fall in line with the accounting year.

(3.) The claims of the workmen were disputed by the establishment on the ground that there was only one continuous season starting from September till June of the following calender year; the nature work demanding closure of the establishment during the monsoon season. It was contended that the workmen were entitled to 7 days' wages as gratuity for such season, the period necessarily not terminating by the end of the calender year and starting anew in the next calender year. The Controlling Authority by a reasoned order dated July 8, 1983, accepting the claim of the workmen, granted them gratuity for two seasons at the rate of 7 days' wages per season in each calendar year. Challenge thereto made by the appellant-establishment before a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka failed. Writ appeals of the appellant-establishment were dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court giving rise to these appeals.