TMI Blog1963 (4) TMI 99X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eriod of work of November 21, 1959, to February 5, 1959, they were paid wages at rates lower than ₹ 55/- per month which was the minimum prescribed wage for workmen of vacuum pan sugar factories of Uttar Pradesh under the Standing Orders dated October 3, 1958, issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh. On July 31, 1962, the Governor of Uttar Pradesh referred to the Labour Court, Lucknow, a dispute between these respondents and the Basti Sugar Mills Ltd. In this the Basti Sugar Mills Ltd., was described as the employers and the respondents as their workmen. The matters in dispute were thus mentioned in the order of reference :- (1) Whether the employers have terminated the services of their workmen, named in the Annexure, will effe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e employer of these 21 persons. It held accordingly that they were entitled to the benefit of the Standing Orders regarding minimum wages and were also entitled to reinstatement. In that view the Labour Court ordered, (a) payment to the Workmen at the rate of ₹ 551 per month from February 6, 1959 upto the end of the crushing season of 1958 59; (b) reinstatement of the workmen if not already employed by the Company in the crushing season of 1962-63; and (c) payment of difference' of wages computed at the rate of ₹ 55/- per month and Re. I/- per day in the case of Ram Ujagar and 14 annas per day in the case of other workmen for the period November 21, 1958 to February 5, 1959. Against this order of the Labour Court the pres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o make the owner of the industry., in the circumstances mentioned in the sub- clause, the employer of the workmen engaged in the work which is done through contract. The words used in the sub- clause are clearly sufficient to achieve this purpose. It is true, as pointed out by Mr. Pathak, that the definition of the word workmen did not contain any words to show that the contract labour was included. That however does not affect the position. The words of the definition of workmen in s. 2 (z) to mean any person (including an apprentice) employed in any industry to do any skilled or unskilled, manual, supervisory, technical or clerical work for hire or reward, 'Whether the terms of employment be express or implied are by themselves s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... suming that the result of this definition of employer in sub-cl. (iv) of s. 2 (i) is the imposition of some restrictions on the appellant's right to carry on trade or business, it cannot be doubted for a moment that the imposition of such restrictions is in the insterest of the general public. For, the interests of the general public require that the device of the engagement of a contractor for doing work which is ordinarily part of the industry should not be allowed to be availed of by owners of industry for evading the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. That these provisions are in the interests of the general public cannot be and has not been disputed. That being the position, the impugned definition which gives the benefit o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmar nor reason supports this argument. On the ordinary grammatical sense of the Words ,employed by a factory they include, in our opinion, every person who is employed to do the work of the factory. The use of the word by has nothing to do with th question as to who makes the Appointment. The reason why by was used instead of 'in appears to be to ensure that if a person has been employed to do the work of the industry, whether the work is done inside the factory or outside the factory, he will get the benefit of the Standing Orders. We can also see no reason why the Government in making the Standing Orders would think of denying to some of the persons who fall within the definition of workmen under the Act, the benefit of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... some workmen who are entitled to be employed by the factory under the provisions of cl. (K). if the facts were known to be as suggested by the learned Counsel we would have felt obliged to take note of these provisions of cl. (K) and would have thought fit to make an order as was made by this Court in similar circumstances in Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Company Ltd. v. Their Workmen (1961 (II) L. L. J. 623), making it clear that there 21 workmen should be re-employed in the crushing season of 1962-63 only in so for as it was possible to do so without breach of the provisions of cl. (K) of the Standing Orders. There are no materials on the record however to show how many of the workmen already employed by the Company in the crushing season of 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
