JUDGEMENT
Kondaiah, J. -
(1.) This appeal by the appellant is directed against the order of the
Employees' State Insurance Court, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad allowing
the application of the respondent under Section 75 of the Employees
State Insurance Act, 1948 thereinafter called 'the Act' restraining
the appellant from collecting Employees' State Insurance contributions
on Productivity Index Plan Bonus.
(2.) The admitted or proved facts leading to this appeal, which lie
in a short compass, may briefly he stated. The respondent -company
which manufactures cigarettes, has employed about 2,400 workmen
who are paid wages, dearness allowances and other allowances payable
to the employees by an industrial establishment. Under the payment
of Bonus Act, 1965, employees are entitled for a minimum bonus of
4% up to a maximum of 20% depending upon the profits earned by the
employer. The respondent company and the Employees' Union there
of have entered into in 1965 and 1970 two settlements evidenced by Exs.
A-1 and A-2 respectively where under the payment of bonus as per the
Productivity Index Plan has been agreed upon. According to the terms
of Ex. A-2, which is now in force, the employees would be eligible to
annual bonus provided the minimum target of 1885 M. Per man hour
is reached. The rate of payment of bonus under the Productivity
Index Plan is shown as per the slabs indicated at page 35 in Ex. A-2
Unless and until the minimum productivity index is 1. 885 M. or above
per man hour, the employees would not be entitled for any bonus for
the relevant period (vide Ex. A-4.) The right to payment of the
annual bonus under the Productivity Index Plan would accrue in law
only after 12 months and before the completion of 20 months. The
company, at the request of the employees, has agreed to pay the bonus
in advance every month for the first eleven months and finally settle the
account after the end of the year. The employees have no right to insist
upon monthly payments as they are entitled in law for the payment
of this annual bonus only after the expiry of 12 months and before 20
months. Clause (c) of the settlement Ex: A-2 empowers the respondent-company
either to modify or cancel any part or the whole of the
comprehensive annual bonus if during the subsistence of the settlement
period, any legislation, rule, order, direction, decree or award is passed
or made applicable to the company enforcing any scheme for bonus
or payment under any incentive or production scheme or plan. The
terms of the settlement have been made by mutual agreement of the
parties. In view of the settlement, Ex A-2, the employees of the
respondent-company are not entitled for any bonus payable under the
Payment of Bonus Act, 1965.
(3.) The respondent is paying the contribution for its employees on
the wages dearness and other allowances due and payable to them. No
contribution in respect of comprehensive annual bonus paid or payable
as per the Productivity Index Plan was being made at any time by the
respondent prior to the present controversy. The appellant for the
first time in his letter dated 7-4-1971, demanded the respondent for
the payment of contribution on the annual bonus paid or payable to
its employees on ths ground that it is wages within the meaning of
section 2(22) of the Act. The respondent-company took the stand that
the annual bonus paid or payable by it to the employees under the
Productivity Index Plan is not wages, and, therefore, no contribution
need be paid thereon. The appellant had sent an Insurance Inspector
to visit the respondent's factory on 23-4-1971 and verify its record
and accounts. Thereafter, the District Collector, Hyderabad was requpsted
to recover by recourse to the Revenue Recovery Act the employer's
contribution payments under the Productivity Bonus Scheme.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.