INDIAN HUME PIPE CO LTD Vs. EMNANAVATY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal from the judgment of Mr. Justice Bhagwati dated September 20, 1945, and raises the short point whether what has occurred between the appellant company and its employees amounts to a trade dispute within the meaning of the Trade Disputes Act, 1929, and as such, is a matter which can be referred to an adjudicator, viz. respondent No. 1, who has been appointed by the Government of Bombay for that purpose under Rule 81A(c) of the Defence of India Rules, 1939. Section 3 of the Trade Disputes Act provides the machinery for referring trade disputes to Courts or boards and by Sub-section 2(j) "trade dispute" is denned to mean any dispute or difference between employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment or non-employment, or the terms of. the employment, or with the conditions of labour, of any person. By Sub-section 2(k) "workman" means any person employed in any trade or industry to do any skilled or unskilled, manual or clerical work for hire or reward, but does not include any person employed in the naval, military or air service of the Crown. Rule 81A(c) of the Defence of India Rules makes provision for referring any trade dispute for conciliation or adjudication in the manner therein provided. In this case the Government having appointed the first respondent such adjudicator, the appellant company seeks by its petition either to obtain a writ of certiorari, or a writ of prohibition, or an injunction under Section 45 of the Specific Relief Act, so as to prevent the adjudicator from entering upon the reference.

(2.) The appellant company employs some 1,200 workmen 700 of whom are members of respondent No. 2 Union which is a trade union registered under the Trade Unions Act.

(3.) In the years 1941, 1942 and 1943 the workmen, apparently through their Union, demanded, and after conciliation proceedings, successfully obtained, what is described as a bonus. The rateable distribution of this bonus appears to have been fixed by reference to the quantum of wages of the individual worker. The demand notices in respect of the years 1941 and 1943 are not before this Court; but that in respect of 1942, which is dated December 13, 1942, and is addressed to the manager of the appellant company, is as follows: Sir, On behalf of and as directed by the General Body of the Union in its resolution of December 12, 1942, I beg to give you notice that if within 14 (fourteen) days of the receipt of this letter, the demands of the workers of the Indian Hume Pipe Co. Ltd.'s workshop at Antop Hill, Vadala, are not dealt with to the satisfaction of the workers and the Hume Pipe Workers Union, the Union will have to resort, with regret, to direct action for getting those demands . Under the heading of "Demands of the Workers," there are a number of paragraphs, paragraphs 1 and 2 being as follows: 1. Special War Bonus equal to one-sixth of the total earnings during the year 1042 of each worker to each worker, irrespective of the period of service. 2. Annual bonus to each worker equal to 1/12 (one-twelfth) of his earnings during the year irrespective of the period of the service. There are eleven other demands ranging from a demand of fifteen days leave with pay to the demand that the members of the staff should stop abusing the workers, as well as beating them during the course of their work, and in working hours. Whether there is or is not any justification for these demands is immaterial: but it cannot in my opinion be said that they are not connected with the workers terms of employment. In respect of the year 1944 the nature of the demand took the following form; Re. Bonus demand. Sir, We the undersigned workers of your factory beg humbly to inform you by this notice, that if within fourteen days of the receipt of the notice, the demand re : bonus we have made below, is not considered and the decision for paying us the bonus is not taken, we will be free to take further proper steps (including strike). We are giving you this notice under Rule 81 of the Defence of India Rules. A copy of the notice is being sent to the Commissioner of Labour and Commissioner of Police, Bombay. The demand: Every worker in the factory should be paid bonus equal to 1/6 of his earnings from January 1 to December 31, 1944, excluding dearness allowance; the bonus should be paid in one instalment before April 15, 1945 . This is signed by more than 700 workers, "from amongst about 1,200 workers". With that demand the appellants were unwilling to comply and in order to prevent strike action, Government in the exercise of its powers under Rule 81A (c) of the Defence of India Rules appointed respondent No. 1 as adjudicator.