BIJLI COTTON MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL II
LAWS(SC)-1972-3-68
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ALLAHABAD)
Decided on March 20,1972

BIJILI COTTON MILLS PRIVATE Appellant
VERSUS
PRESIDING OFFICER,INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL II Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The following dispute between M/s. Bijili Cotton Mills (P) Ltd., and their workmen was referred to the Industrial Tribunal II, U. P. for adjudication: "Should the employers be required to pay wages for the festival holidays allowed to their workmen in a year If so, from which date and with what other details - According to the workmen the employers had been giving 17 festival holidays to their workmen in a year and though those holidays should have been paid ones the employers were not making any payment.
(2.) The dispute was originally espoused at the instance of Hathras Mazdoor Panchayat but later three other unions namely Sooti Mill Mazdoor Panchayat, Congress Mazdoor Sangh and Suti Mill Karmachari Sangh were also accorded right of representation on their applications. The employer mills contested the claim on various grounds. The plea on the merits in substance was to the effect that neither in law nor in practice was there any provision for festival holidays with wages. The Mill, it was averred, was already paying wages for three holidays allowed to the workmen under the U. P. Industrial Establishments (National Holidays) Act (U. P. Act XVIII of 1961) and in the entire Agra region in which this Mill is situated no textile mill pays wages for festival holidays. It was added that the Mill was an uneconomic unit and was not in a position to bear any extra burden. The Congress Mazoor Sangh, the Sooti Mill Karmachari Sangh and the Hathras Mazdoor Panchayat filed separate written statements on behalf of the workmen and pleaded that the grant of holidays without wages was illegal and against social justice.
(3.) The employer Mill filed rejoinder statement to the written statements of all the Unions, pleading that the holidays mentioned by the Unions were not allowed to the workmen at the employer's initiative but were granted because the workmen demanded the same and these holidays were substituted by other days in lieu of holidays, and as they were paid for the days on which they worked on account of these holidays there was no loss of wages caused to the workmen.;


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