1966 (10) TMI 169 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Calculation of bonus allocation for the accounting year ending 30-6-1965.
2. Entitlement of workmen to a higher bonus rate than 6% of wages for the accounting year ending 30-6-1965.
3. Legality and justification of the strike at Delhi Cloth Mills and the lock-out declared by the management on 24-2-1966, and entitlement of workmen to wages for the lock-out period.
4. Legality and justification of the sit-down strike at Swatantra Bharat Mills from 23-2-1966, and entitlement of workmen to wages during the strike period.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Calculation of Bonus Allocation:
The first issue pertains to whether the allocations made by the Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co., Ltd. towards the capital and reserves for the Delhi Cloth Mills and Swatantra Bharat Mills for the accounting year ending 30-6-1965 were fair and reasonable. The Tribunal concluded that it would be open to the parties to adduce evidence regarding this issue. If it was found that the claim was barred due to previous settlements, the claim would not be allowed. The Tribunal emphasized that the parties were not bound by any agreement for the year 1964-65, and thus, evidence was required to resolve this issue.

2. Entitlement to Higher Bonus Rate:
This issue was not separately analyzed in detail in the judgment. However, it is implicitly linked to the first issue regarding the calculation of bonus allocation. The resolution of the first issue would inherently affect the determination of whether the workmen were entitled to a higher bonus rate than 6% of wages.

3. Legality and Justification of the Strike and Lock-out:
The Tribunal was tasked with determining the legality and justification of the strike at Delhi Cloth Mills and the lock-out declared by the management on 24-2-1966. The Tribunal held that it was not competent to the workmen to argue that there was no strike at all, nor to the management to deny the lock-out. The Tribunal had to examine the evidence to determine whether the strikes were justified and legal, and consequently, whether the workmen were entitled to wages for the lock-out period.

4. Legality and Justification of the Sit-down Strike:
The fourth issue concerned the sit-down strike at Swatantra Bharat Mills from 23-2-1966. The Tribunal was to examine whether the sit-down strike was justified and legal. It was not open to the Unions to contend that there was no sit-down strike. The Tribunal had to determine the legality and justification of the strike to decide on the entitlement of workmen to wages during the strike period.

Conclusion and Orders:
The Supreme Court held that the preliminary objection of the Management with regard to issues 3 and 4 succeeded, meaning the Tribunal had to proceed on the basis that there was a strike and a lock-out as mentioned in the reference. The Tribunal was to determine the legality and justification of these actions. The preliminary objection of the Management failed on issue 1, meaning the Tribunal needed to take evidence to resolve the issue of bonus allocation. The appeals from the orders of the High Court were dismissed, and the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal for decision in light of the observations made.

Judgment Summary:
- Appeals Nos. 2101 and 2102 of 1966 dismissed without costs.
- Appeal No. 2100/1966 remanded back to the Tribunal for further decision.
- No order as to costs for Appeal No. 2100/1966.