S. B. Majmudar, J. - (1.) The Maharashtra State Electricity Board by grant of special leave has brought in challenge the decision rendered by the Division Bench of Bombay High Court by which an order of remand was passed directing the Tribunal functioning under the Industrial Tribunal, Maharashtra, Bombay to recompute the allocable surplus for deciding whether the workmen under the appellant-Board were entitled to more than minimum 4 per cent bonus for the years 1965-66 to 1969-70.
(2.) In order to appreciate the grievance made by learned Senior Counsel for the appellant-Board against the remanded proceedings it would be necessary to narrate a few introductory facts. The appellant-Board is a statutory undertaking as defined in Section 5 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. It is employing in connection with its statutory functions a number of workmen. It is not in dispute that Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) applies to the appellant concern and its workmen. Two trade unions i.e. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on behalf of workmen of the appellant raised an industrial dispute pertaining to non-payment of appropriate statutory bonus to their members for the aforesaid relevant years as according to them, allocable surplus with the Board for these years was sufficient to make available to the workmen more than 4 per cent bonus. Their claim was based on Section 8 of the Act which lays down that every employee shall be entitled to be paid by his employer in an accounting year, bonus, in accordance with the provisions of this Act, provided he has worked in the establishment for not less than thirty working days in that year.
(3.) They also relied on Section 11 of the said Act. This dispute was referred for adjudication to the Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that after effecting relevant deductions on various items which the appellant-Board sought to get deducted from the gross profits for the relevant years, no allocable surplus for the relevant years resulted. Consequently, the workmen were not entitled to any bonus exceeding 4 per cent which was minimum statutory bonus payable under Section 10 as it stood during the relevant accounting years, irrespective of the fact whether any allocable surplus resulted for the relevant years or not and consequently the reference was decided against the respondents. The respondents carried the matter in a writ petition before the Bombay High Court. A learned single Judge after hearing the parties confirmed the decision of the Tribunal and that is how the respondents carried the matter under Letters Patent before the Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench took the view that the disputed items which were deducted by the Tribunal from the gross profits for the relevant years were not deductible. Consequently, the Tribunal was required to recompute the allocable surplus for all these relevant years and hence the impugned remand order was passed.;