Bhargava, J. - (1.) The workmen of Orient Paper Mills Ltd., Brajrajnagar, have come up in this appeal by special leave against an award of the industrial Tribunal, Orissa. An industrial dispute between these workmen and the management of Orient Paper Mills Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the Company") was referred by the State Government underSection10 (1) (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred as "the Act") for adjudication by the Tribunal enumerating 30 different items of dispute. The Tribunal gave its award on all the thirty items. The special leave in this Court was sought and granted in respect of two matters covering of some of these items. The first matter related to fixation of wages, including minimum wages, and this was covered by items Nos. 1,3, 4, 22 and 26 in the schedule attached to the Order of Reference. The second matter in the appeal related to bonus covered by item No. 2 of that schedule. In the course of the hearing of the appeal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the workmen further gave up some of the points which were the subject-matter of the items mentioned above, so that in this judgment we need deal with only those points which were argued by him in support of the appeal.
(2.) The first and the main point argued with regard to wages was that the Tribunal, after holding that there was no identical industry in this region comparable with the Company, came to the view that there were other industries in region in which minimum wages were higher than the minimum wages paid by the Company, but failed to fix the minimum wages in the award in accordance with the minimum wages being paid in those industries. Instead, what the Tribunal did was to work out the minimum wages, which should be paid, on an entirely different basis. It was also urged in the alternative that, even in adopting the latter course, the Tribunal committee an error inasmuch as, in making the calculation, the Tribunal only tried to neutralise about 36 per cent of the cost of living on the basis of the rise in Price Index instead of permitting neutralisation to the extent of at least 90%, which should have been done when fixing the minimum wages for the lowest class of workmen.
(3.) The principle for fixation of minimum wages that should ordinarily be adopted was laid down by this Court in the case of French Motor Car Co., Limited vs. Workmen, (1963) 2 Suppl. SCR 16 where it was held:- "It is now well settled that the principle of industry-cum-region has to be applied by an Industrial Court, when it proceeds to consider questions like wage structure, dearness allowance and similar conditions of service. In applying that principle, Industrial Courts have to compare wage scales prevailing in similar concerns in the region with which it is dealing, and generally speaking similar concerns would be those in the same line of business as the concern with respect to which the dispute is under consideration. Further, even in the same line of business, it would not be proper to compare (for example) a small struggling concern with a large flourishing concern." The Tribunal, in giving its decision, kept this principle in view, but came to the finding of fact that there were no other concerns in the same line of business as the Company in the region which could be compared with the Company. The Tribunal found that there are only two other paper mills in the region. They are the Titaghur Paper Mill No.3 situated at Chaudwar, and the J. K. Paper Mills at Rayagada. The Tribunal found that the Company is an old established business carrying on manufacture of paper on a very large scale. The Titaghur Paper Mill No. 3 started production only in April, 1960, while the J. K. Paper Mills at Rayagada started production in 1961-62 These two Paper Mills were, therefore, both of very recent origin compared with the Company. The strength of their labour-force and the annual production were also very much lower. Even the profits earned were much smaller. On these facts, the Tribunal held that it would not be proper to compare the wage structure for these Paper Mills with that of the Company. This is a finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal and nothing has been shown by learned Counsel for the Company which would induce us to interfere with this finding of fact. In fact, learned Counsel was unable to urge that this finding of fact suffered from any error at all. On this finding, it is clear that the region-cum-industry principle laid down in the case of French Motor Car Co. Ltd. (supra) could not have been applied by the Tribunal when fixing the wages in the Company.;