RAJA KULKARNI Vs. STATE OF BOMBAY
LAWS(SC)-1951-11-7
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: BOMBAY)
Decided on November 21,1951

RAJA KULKARNI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF BOMBAY Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

MARUTI UDYOG LIMITED VS. INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [LAWS(DLH)-2001-4-121] [REFERRED]
RAM SINGH VS. P K JAIN [LAWS(DLH)-2002-8-223] [REFERRED]
SHRAVANKUMAR MAHADEV DEKOTE VS. ARVIND MILLS LIMITED AHMEDABAD [LAWS(GJH)-1984-9-24] [REFERRED]
SHATRUSHAILYA DIGVIJAYSINGH JADEJA VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RAJKOT [LAWS(GJH)-2002-9-55] [REFERRED]
UTTAR PRADESHIYA SHRAMIK MAHA SANGH LUCKNOW VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-1959-4-5] [REFERRED TO]
MANNA LAL VS. MST CHHOTKA BIBI [LAWS(ALL)-1964-5-3] [REFERRED TO]
SHIV CHARAN DAS VS. RUKMANI DEVI [LAWS(ALL)-1975-3-2] [REFERRED TO]
JANKI DAS LACHCHMI NARAIN VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(ALL)-2004-11-10] [REFERRED TO]
MUSALA ANNAJI RAO VS. BOGGARAPU PAPAIAH SETTY [LAWS(APH)-1974-4-14] [REFERRED TO]
MARRIDDI JANIKAMMA VS. HANUMANTHA VAJJULA PARADESI SARMA [LAWS(APH)-1979-12-27] [REFERRED TO]
GEETA BALA GOYAL VS. KAILASH CHANDRA [LAWS(ALL)-2008-11-49] [REFERRED TO]
KESORAM RAYON WORKMENS UNION VS. REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS [LAWS(CAL)-1966-11-5] [REFERRED TO]
A C MUKHERJEE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-1971-12-8] [REFERRED TO]
B N RAMAKRISHNA NAIDU VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-1954-9-5] [REFERRED TO]
V NARASIMHACHARIAR VS. EGMORE BENEFIT SOCIETY 3RD BRANCH LTD [LAWS(MAD)-1954-11-8] [REFERRED TO]
AINTHU CHARAN PARIDA VS. SITARAM JAYANARAYAN FIRM [LAWS(ORI)-1984-8-1] [REFERRED TO]
BAL KISHAN VS. TULSA BAI [LAWS(MPH)-1986-9-3] [REFERRED TO]
M A DAVID VS. KSEB [LAWS(KER)-1971-10-10] [REFERRED TO]
RAMBHAROSE SINGH VS. HEMLATA AATHLE [LAWS(MPH)-1994-5-14] [REFERRED TO]
MANIRAM VS. FULESHWAR [LAWS(MPH)-1995-9-18] [REFERRED TO]
BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR PORT OF CALCUTTA VS. HALDIA CALCUTTA PORT AND DOCK SHRAMIK UNION [LAWS(CAL)-1993-8-26] [REFERRED TO]
S B JAIN I T O NAGPUR VS. MAHANDERA [LAWS(SC)-1971-9-2] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAM SUNDER SHARMA VS. PANNALAL JAISWAL [LAWS(SC)-2004-11-50] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. SHATRUSAILYA DIGVIJAYSINGH JADEJA [LAWS(SC)-2005-9-81] [REFERRED TO]
M N ABDUL RAWOOF VS. PICHAMUTHU [LAWS(SC)-2000-2-180] [RELIED]
RANI CHOUDHURY VS. LT COL SURAJ JIT CHOUDHURY [LAWS(SC)-1982-8-15] [REFERRED TO]
BALMER LAWRIE WORKERS UNION BOMBAY VS. BALMER LAWRIE AND COMPANY LIMITED [LAWS(SC)-1984-12-24] [REFERRED TO]
CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD VS. SH SANJEEV KUMAR [LAWS(DLH)-2012-8-176] [REFERRED TO]
SHETH ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [LAWS(GJH)-1999-3-52] [REFERRED]
SHARAD BANSILAL VAKIL VS. SUO MOTU [LAWS(GJH)-2006-3-37] [REFERRED TO]
PALIWAL GHLASS WORKS VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2012-6-11] [REFERRED TO]
ALLAHABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ALLAHABAD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2012-6-12] [REFERRED TO]
JAGAT JANANI DEBI VS. JYOTSNA BASU [LAWS(CAL)-1978-4-43] [REFERRED TO]
K P SHENOY VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-1994-12-6] [FOLLOWED ON]
NAIK N M VS. COLABA LAND MILLS [LAWS(BOM)-1958-8-4] [REFERRED TO]
AMARLAL KIRANA STORES VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(MPH)-2002-11-31] [REFERRED TO]
B THANKAPPAN VS. TRIVANDRUM DIST CO OP BANK LTD [LAWS(KER)-1986-1-1] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER HUBLI DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION VS. SHRISHAIL [LAWS(KAR)-2003-7-98] [REFERRED TO]
THAMBI VS. MATHEW [LAWS(KER)-1987-10-48] [REFERRED TO]
MALWA TEXTURISING PVT LTD VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(MPH)-2006-7-6] [REFERRED TO]
RAMAN GOPI VS. KUNJU RAMAN UTHAMAN [LAWS(KER)-2009-7-37] [REFERRED TO]
Mina Fusade VS. Shibaiji Dash [LAWS(BOM)-2005-10-130] [REFERRED TO]
SWAM MILLS LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(BOM)-2006-4-65] [REFERRED TO]
A S KRISHNAMURTHY VS. CENTRAL INDIA SPINING WEAVING AND MANUFACTURING CO LTD [LAWS(BOM)-2006-11-144] [REFERRED TO]
BETTER LABEL MANUFACTURING CO LTD VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [LAWS(MAD)-2008-3-18] [REFERRED TO]
M M P M SYED MOHAMED VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2011-6-536] [REFERRED TO]
HARNAM SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-1974-1-15] [REFERRED TO]
FATEH SINGH VS. GOPI [LAWS(RAJ)-1964-4-4] [REFERRED TO]
Capstan Meter India LTD VS. State of Rajasthan [LAWS(RAJ)-1973-8-4] [REFERRED TO]
RAMAUTAR SAH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-1977-4-4] [REFERRED TO]
JOGENDRA PRASAD SINGH VS. SATYA NARAYAN SINGH [LAWS(PAT)-2002-1-103] [REFERRED TO]
LAL JHANDA ROCKMAN CYCLE INDUSTRIES WORKERS UNION VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2006-9-14] [REFERRED TO]
PANDEY AND CO BUILDERS PVT LTD VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2005-4-66] [REFERRED TO]
KISHORE RUNGTA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2012-7-234] [REFERRED TO]
PURVOTTAR RAILWAY SRAMIK SANGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2014-1-90] [REFERRED TO]
Aditya Soni VS. State of M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2001-8-88] [REFERRED TO]
National Transport Company, Seoni VS. State Transport authority M.P., Gwalior [LAWS(MPH)-1959-5-11] [REFERRED TO]
DHARANI SUGARS AND CHEMICAL LIMITED VS. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND ANR. [LAWS(MAD)-2010-12-413] [REFERRED TO]
CHANAN DASS VS. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-1966-9-19] [REFERRED TO]
JANARDAN SHRIDHAR AND ANR. VS. MANAGEMENT HUKUMCHAND MILLS LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(MPH)-1956-1-9] [REFERRED TO]
RAIL COACH FACTORY MENS UNION VS. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) [LAWS(DLH)-2010-3-429] [REFERRED TO]
HALDIA-CALCUTTA PORT AND DOCK SHRAMIK UNION VS. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) [LAWS(CAL)-1992-1-42] [REFERRED TO]
RAM MURTI CHOUDHARY VS. RAM NIHORA CHOUDHARY [LAWS(PAT)-2016-8-28] [REFERRED TO]
PANKU SON OF SUKHLAL HALBA VS. MANBHA BAI D/O SUKHLAL [LAWS(CHH)-2016-5-13] [REFERRED TO]
KASHI RAM VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-12-98] [REFERRED TO]
RAM PRASAD VS. ADDL. DIST. JUDGE COURT NO. 4 SPL. JUDGE [LAWS(ALL)-2019-12-144] [REFERRED TO]
RAMA DEVI VS. ADDL. DIST. AND SESSION JUDGE [LAWS(ALL)-2020-2-4] [REFERRED TO]
SIDDAPPA MADIVALAPPA UGARKHOD VS. BASAVARAJ KALLAPA KUGATI [LAWS(KAR)-2019-12-181] [REFERRED TO]
RITESH BAKULESHBHAI MEHTA VS. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(GJH)-2021-8-183] [REFERRED TO]
TUSHAR AGRO CHEMICALS VS. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(GJH)-2021-7-565] [REFERRED TO]
BHASKAR MANUBHAI MEHTA VS. DESIGNATED AUTHORITY PR. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OR HIS SUCCESSOR [LAWS(GJH)-2021-9-835] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)These consolidated appeals by the three appellants arise out of the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Bavdekar and Dixit, JJ.), where by the High Court confirmed the convictions of the appellants recorded by the Presidency Magistrate. Fifth Court, Greator Bombay, under Section 27 of the Industrial Disputes (Appellate Tribunal) Act (No. XI. VIII) of1950) but reduced their sentences from six months' rigorous imprisonment to three month's simple imprisonment and set aside against each of the appellant the sentence of fine of Rs. 1,000. The appellants are the President and the Secretaries of the Mill Mazdoor Sabba, a Union of Textile Workers in Bombay registered under the Indian Trade Union Act.
It appears that there are about 2,10,000 Textile workers working in Bombay and about 35 per cent, of them belong to three different labour Unions. The first is called 'Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh' which is recognized as a 'representative Union' under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946, on the ground that it represents not less than 15 per cent of such Textile workers. The second is called 'the Mill Mazdoor Sabha', of which the appellants are the office bearers, but this Union represents less than 15 per cent; and the third is 'Girni Kamgar Union' representing the least percentage of workers. It is common ground that apart from the members of the above three Unions, a large number of workers representing about 65 per cent are unorganized and do not belong to any Union.

(2.)On December 9, 1949, the representative Union gave a notice of change under Section 42 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946, hereinafter called the Act to the Mill Owners Association in Bombay claiming bonus for that year. On December 23, the dispute was referred by the Government of Bombay to the Industrial Court under Section 23 of the said Act. While this dispute was pending, the Industrial Disputes (appellate Tribunal) Act (No. XI. VIII of 1950) hereinafter called the Appellate Tribunal Act, came into force on May 20, 1950.
On July 7, the Industrial Court made the award and the same was published on July 13. On August 9, the Mill Owners Association, which was dissatisfied with the award, filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal and an ad-interim order was passed on August 10, directing how the bonus should be paid. The appellants made speeches on August 14, 15 and 16, exhorting the workers of the Textile Industry to go on strike. The Labour commissioner thereupon filed complaints before the Presidency Magistrate on August 28, charging the appellants with an offence under Section 27 of Appellate Tribunal Act. The Mill Mazdoor Sabha applied to be made a party to the appeal, but the application was rejected. As already stated, the appellants were convicted by the Presidency Magistrate, but their sentences were reduced on appeal by the High Court.

(3.)Two main contentions were raised on behalf of the appellants, firstly that the conviction under Section 27 of the Appellate Tribunal Act was illegal, because there was no competent and valid appeal against the award before the Appellate Tribunal and secondly that Section 27 of the Act is void as being opposed to the fundamental rights of the appellants under Article 19(1) (a) and (c), and 14 of the Constitution, Both the contentions were repelled by the two learned Judges who delivered separate but concurrent judgment. The contentions have been reiterated before us.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.