HIDAYATULLAH, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal by the workmen of India Explosives, Ltd., Gomla, District Hazaribagh (Bihar), against their employers, which arises out of an award of the industrial tribunal, Patna, dated 18 July, 1961, in Reference No. 31 of 1960. The Government of Bihar made the reference for the decision of the question whether the workmen were entitled to any bonus and, if so, what should be the quantum of bonus. The claim of the workmen was in respect of two years but we are now concerned only with the bonus year ending on 30 September, 1960. By the award impugned here the tribunal held that the claim was not justified because after the deductions according to the Full Bench formula were made from the gross profits there was no available surplus. In this appeal by special leave the workmen question the correctness of the above conclusion.
(2.) AFTER hearing arguments on both asides we are satisfied that the appeal must fail. Although there were some errors in the calculation of the available surplus by the tribunal the resulting position does not alter even after those mistakes are rectified. Those errors were in not adding back two sums on account of travelling expenses (Rs. 1, 53, 310) and amounts set apart for gratuity and leave travelling (Rs. 91, 605). As the company has conceded these two items we shall deal with this case very shortly because the controversy now lies within an extremely narrow compass. Both sides agree that the net profits were Rs. 43, 76, 877 and also agree to the following additions and deductions in accordance with the Full Bench formula : Rs. Net profits . . . . . . . . . 43, 76, 877 Add back - Depreciation . . . . . . 22, 71, 744 Add back - Travelling expenses . . . 1, 53, 310 Provision for gratuity and leave travelling . . . . . . 91, 605 ------------ Total gross profits . . . 68, 93, 536Deduct - Notional depreciation . . . 36, 76, 739 ------------ Balance . . . 32, 16, 797 Income-tax at 45 per cent on gross profits minus statutory depreciation and development rebate, i.e. - (68, 93.536 - 36, 76, 739 + 4, 96, 722) = 27, 20, 075 . . . . . . 12, 24, 033 Balance . . . 19, 92, 764 Up to this point there is no difference between the parties. The company next seeks to deduct a further sum of parties. The company next seeks to deduct a further sum of Rs. 4, 50, 000 which represents income tax at 20 per cent on dividend paid to shareholders. 3. The workmen resist this deduction. Arguments were advanced in support of the rival claims but there is no need to go into them. Even if this deduction is disallowed, the claim of the workmen for bonus is not in any way bettered. This is easily established. We have reached the sum of Rs. 19, 92, 764 which is an agreed figure. From it must be deducted under the formula a sum of Rs. 18, 00, 000 representing 6 per cent return on the paid-up capital. This leaves a sum of Rs. 1, 92, 764. From this amount two more items are yet to be deducted. They are : (a) return on reserves employed as capital in business, and (b) rehabilitation charges.
(3.) THESE , taken with the ex gratia bonus, equal to one month's basic wage already paid which is a sum of Rs. 1, 10, 000, does not leave any amount as surplus from which to pay any further bonus. It was contended that no rehabilitation charges should be allowed as the company was in its first year of production. This is not correct. The company was formed in 1956 and started production in 1958. In this bonus year rehabilitation will have to be calculated and deducted according to the Full Bench formula.;