ANUSUYA VITHAL Vs. J H MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which arises for determination in these two applications, is whether compensation, payable to workers, who have been laid-off, under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is "wages" within the meaning of the payment of Wages Act. The term "lay-off" is defined in clause (kkk) of section 2 of the Industrial Dispute Act as meaning the failure, refusal or inability of an employer on account of shortage of coal, power or raw materials or the accumulation of tocks or the breakdown of machinery or for any other reason to give employent to a workman whose name is borne on the muster rolls of his industrial establishment and wo has not been retrenched. To put it briefly, lay-off therefore means the failure, refusal or inability of an employer to give employment to his employee. There is an Explanation to this cause, which states:

(2.) Standing Order No. 17 of the Standing Orders settled by the Industrial Court under section 36(3) of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946, and which determines the relations between the petitioners and their employers, i.e., the second respondents, is as follows:

(3.) The next question to be considerred is whether the compensatio granted for lay-off is wages within the meaning of the Payment of Wages Act. The definition of the word "wages" given in the Act was amended in 1957. The mended definition is as follows:-