9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (4) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bonus Act, 1965, (the Bonus Act, for short). The bonus branch of labour law, however, is not exhausted by this enactment and has been replenished by judge-made law, drawing sustenance from practice and precedent, custom and contract. Against this backdrop, we have to state and assess the single issue strenuously canvassed before us by the appellant-management challenging the award of the Industrial Tribunal and urging that the Bonus Act, as amended by Act 23 of 1976, annihilates all species of bonus including customary and contractual bonus. The claim of the Union of Workmen is for customary bonus, the reference to industrial adjudication relates to customary bonus, and the special leave to appeal granted by this Court is confined to custo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e adjudication and, finally, the special leave itself revolved round customary bonus. The specific case of the Management was that customary bonus could no longer be payable, in view of the provisions of the 1976 amendment. A statutory fatality was sought to be spelt out of its provisions before the Tribunal and before us. We emphasize this to exclude a hazy, though half-hearted plea mentioned by Shri G. B. Pai for the appellant that here the bonus was based on agreement and no agreement as such could avail in view of s. 34, read with s. 31A, (as amended by the 1976 Act). Apart from the law relied on, it is somewhat starting that bonus paid by settlement between the parties qua customary bonus at least since 1962-63 (see page 4 of the Paper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 20-3-1975. In view of this undertaking we grant special leave to appeal and even if the appellants succeed in this appeal, they will not ask for costs against the workmen concerned. The Bonus Act (1965) was a complete code but was confined to profit-oriented bonus only. Other kinds of bonus have flourished in Indian Industrial law and have been left uncovered by the Bonus Act. The legislative universe spanned by the said statute cannot therefore affect the rights and obligations belonging to a different world or claims and conditions. This has, in the Mumbai Kamgar s case(1) exhaustively dealt with the anatomy of the Bonus Act, its functional scope its modalities and its operational frontiers to reach the following conclusion: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is precisely the justification for his submission that the new provisions nullify all kinds of claims of bonus except profit-or-productivity-based bonuses, having regard to ss. 31A and 34A brought into the statute Act. Counsel made his goal-oriented submissions by taking us through the new provisions. As we have stated earlier many of the statutory modifications brought about in 1976 in the then wisdom of Parliament have been repealed and the original position restored in 1977 by the later wisdom of the new Parliament. However, we are concerned only with the import and effect of the few provisions incorporated by Act 23 of 1976. The fundamental fact which we must reiterate is that the Bonus Act before the 1976 amendment had nothing to sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bonus. So long as this Section remains without amendment the inference is clear that the categories covered by the Act, as amended, did not deal with customary bonus Strong reliance was placed by counsel for the appellant on new s. 31A read with substituted s. 34. It is proper to read s. 34 at this stage: 34. Subject to the provisions of section 31A, the provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or in the terms of any award, agreement, settlement or contract of service. The only changes that we notice as between this Section and its predecessor are (i) that agreements, settlements and contracts of service inconsistent with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agreement it has been not the source of the right but the quantification thereof. The claim was rooted in custom but quantified by contract. It did not originate in any agreement, but was organised by it. We are, therefore, satisfied that the appeal must fail. We should have unhesitatingly directed costs to be paid by the management-appellant to the respondent-workmen; but during the course of the hearing we were far from impressed with the attitude taken up by the respondent. While the merits of the matter have to be decided indifferent to such factors, costs are discretionary and we are constrained to dismiss the appeal, directing both the parties to bear their respective costs. Appeal dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Indian L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
