ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANIES LIMITED CHAIBASA CEMENT WORKS JHINKPANI Vs. THEIR WORKMEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) , J. : This appeal by special leave from an award dated 10-10-1956, made by the Industrial. Tribunal, Bihar, raises an important question of interpretation in the matter of a disqualification for lay-off compensation under S. 25E read with S. 25C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), and so far as we know, this is the first case of its kind in which the expression "in another part of the establishment" occurring in cl. (iii) of S. 25E has come up for an authoritative interpretation.

(2.) THE facts are simple and are shortly set out below. THE Associated Cement Companies Ltd., hereinafter called the Company, have a number of cement factories in different States of the Indian Union as also in Pakistan. THEre are two such factories in the State of Bihar, one at Khelari and the other at a place called Jhinkpani in the district of Chaibasa in Bihar. THE latter factory is commonly known as the Chaibasa Cement Works. THEre is a limestone quarry owned by the same Company situate about a mile and a half from the Chaibasa Cement Works, the quarry being known as the Rajanka limestone quarry. Limestone is the principal raw material for the manufacture of cement and the Chaibasa Cement Works depended exclusively for the supply of limestone on the said quarry. At the time relevant to this appeal there were two classes of labourers at the quary, those employed by the Company through the management of the Chaibasa Cement Works and others who were engaged by a contractor. THEre was one union known as the Chaibasa Cement Workers' Union, hereinafter called the Union, of which the Company's labourers both at the Cement Works and the quarry were members. THEre was another union consisting of the contractor's labourers which was known as the A. C. C. Limestone Contractor's Mazdoor Union. On 3-1-1955, the Union made certain demands on the management on behalf of the labourers in the limestone quarry, but these were rejected by the management. THEn by a subsequent letter dated 18-2-1955,the Central Secretary of the Union gave a notice to the Manager of the Chaibasa Cement Works to the effect that the Union proposed to organise a general stay-in-strike in the limestone quarry from 1-3-1955, if certain demands, details whereof are unnecessary for our purpose, were not granted on or before 28-2-1955. A similar notice was also given on behalf of the A. C. C. Limestone Contractor's Mazdoor Union. THEse notices led to certain efforts at conciliation which, however, failed. On 24-2-1955, the management gave a notice to all employees of the Chaibasa Cement Works, in which it was stated that in the event of the strike materalising in the limestone quarry, it would be necessary for the management to close down certain sections of the factory at Jhinkpani on account of the non-supply of limestone; the notice further stated that in the event of such closure, it would be necessary to lay off the workers not required during the period of closure for the sections concerned. THE strike commenced on 1-3-1955, and lasted till 4-7-1955. On 25/03/1955, the management wrote to the General Secretary of the Union intimating to him that the workers in certain departments referred to in an earlier letter dated 19-3-1955, would be laid -off with effect from 1-4-1955. On 28/03/1955, the management gave the lists of employees who were to be laid-off with effect from 1-4-1955, and they were actually laid-off from that date. During the period of the strike fresh efforts at conciliation were made and ultimately the strike came to an end on 5-7-1955, when the Central Government referred the dispute between the management and the workers of the limestone quarry to the Central Industrial Tribunal at Dhanbad. This reference was, however, withdrawn by mutual consent in terms of a settlement arrived at 7-12-1955. THE details of this settlement are not relevant to this appeal.

(3.) THE evidence was really onesided and the only witness examined was Mr. Dongray, Manager of the Chaibasa Cement Works. Now, the relation between the limestone quarry and the factory can be considered from several points of view, such as (1) ownership, (2) control and supervision, (3) finance, (4) management and employment, (5) geographical proximity and (6) general unity of purpose and functional integrality, with particular reference to the industrial process of making cement. On all the above points Mr. Dongray gave evidence. It was not disputed that the Company owned the limestone quarry as also the factory and there was unity of ownership. Mr. Dongray's evidence further showed that there was unity of control, management and employment. He said that the limestone quarry was treated as a part and parcel of the Chaibasa Cement Works, that is, as a department thereof and he as the Manger was in over all charge of both, though there was a Quarry Manager in charge as a departmental head under him. On this point Mr. Dongray said :