B.N. Banerjee, J. - (1.) The four petitioners and respondent No. 5 in Matter No. 287 of 1961 and the petitioners in Matter No. 38 of 1962 are Chartered Accountants and carry on business in partnership under the name and style of Lovelock and Lewes at No. 4 Lyon's Range, Calcutta.
(2.) There arose a dispute between the partnership business and its employees represented by their Union (respondent No. 2, in Matter No. 287 of 1961, which is again respondent No, 3 in Matter No. 38 of 1962) over payment of bonus. The respondent State Government referred the dispute to the First Industrial Tribunal for adjudication, the issue being couched in the following language : "Whether the employees of Lovelock and Lewes are entitled to bonus? If so, what will be quantum of bonus for 1952/53 and 1953/54?"
(3.) The petitioners took two preliminary objections to the effect (i) that as persons practising as Chartered Accountants they do not carry on an industry within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act and that employees under Chartered Accountants are not workmen within the meaning of the said Act and as such, the Industrial Disputes Act has no application to the dispute and that the reference was incompetent; (ii) that the petitioners were debarred by the provisions of the Chartered Accountants Act from paying profit-sharing bonus to their employees, because that would amount to a professional misconduct under the Act. On the two preliminary objections raised, there were two preliminary issues framed to the following effect : (i) Whether the dispute referred to is an "industrial dispute"? (ii) Is Messrs. Lovelock and Lewes debarred by any provision of the Chartered Accountants Act from paying bonus as claimed on the ground that that amounts to sharing fees/income with any person other than a member of the Institute or retired partner, During the pendency of the Reference, the Union of the employees asked for production of certain documents. That prayer was disposed of by order No. 34, dated June 29, 1961, to the following effect: "Mr. Mukherjee does not insist on the production of any of the documents mentioned in the affidavit. The documents that would be sufficient for the purpose are stated to be a statement by the firm of its profits for the year 1952-53, 1953-54 and accordingly the aggregate of the total basic wages of the clerical and the subordinate staff for a month for the year 1953-53, 1953-54 on the basis of which the firm has already paid Bonus for those years. If the Association accepts the statement, no document such as mentioned in the Affidavit filed by the Association need be produced. If on the other hand, the Association does not accept any of the statements or none of the statements, the Association may have to ask for production- of the cash books showing receipts for the year 1952-53, 1953-54 and also the salary Register for the clerical and the subordinate staff for the year 1952-53 and 1953-54-";