Case Note & Summary
The Central Wage Board for the sugar industry recommended revised wage scales, categories, and fitment of workmen effective from November 1, 1960. The State Government accepted these recommendations. The appellant, Tulsipur Sugar Company Ltd., failed to implement them, leading its workmen to raise a dispute. Two questions were referred to the Labour Court under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: the fitment of certain workmen into the new grades and the date from which such fitment should take effect. The Labour Court held that two workmen should be fitted into specified grades and directed compliance within one month after the award became enforceable, but inadvertently omitted to fix the date of effect. The award was published on December 7, 1963, and became enforceable on January 7, 1964, under Section 6A(1) of the Act. The company fitted the workmen from February 7, 1964, i.e., one month after enforceability. The union applied for amendment, and the Labour Court amended its award, directing fitment from November 1, 1960, as per the Wage Board recommendation. This amendment was published on June 20, 1964. The appellant challenged the amendment in the High Court by writ petition, which was dismissed. On appeal, the Supreme Court considered whether the correction was for an accidental omission within Section 6(6) of the Act and whether it could be made after the award became final. The appellant argued that the omission was not accidental and that the Labour Court lacked jurisdiction to correct an award that had become final. The respondents contended that the omission was a clear accidental slip, as the Court had failed to answer the second referred question. The Supreme Court held that the omission was indeed an accidental omission within the meaning of Section 6(6), as the Labour Court had jurisdiction and duty to decide both referred questions, and its failure to do so was inadvertent. The power under Section 6(6) to correct clerical or accidental mistakes is not lost upon the award becoming final under Section 6A(4). The correction was not a review or an appeal but merely a rectification of a mistake. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed, and the correction order was upheld.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Labour Court - Correction of Award - Section 6(6) U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The Labour Court omitted to fix the date of effect of fitment recommended by the Wage Board, which was one of the referred questions; such omission was accidental within the meaning of s.6(6); Held, the Court has power to correct such accidental omission, and it does not amount to review or appeal. (Paras Not mentioned) B) Industrial Law - Labour Court - Finality of Award - Section 6A(4) U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The award had become final and enforceable under s.6A(4); However, the power under s.6(6) to correct clerical or accidental mistakes is not extinguished by the award becoming final; Held, the correction order was valid even though made after the award became enforceable. (Paras Not mentioned)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Labour Court had jurisdiction under Section 6(6) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, to correct an alleged accidental omission to fix the date from which fitment was to take effect, and whether such correction could be made after the award had become final and enforceable.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. The correction fell within the ambit of accidental omission under Section 6(6) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the Labour Court retained jurisdiction to correct such omission even after the award became final and enforceable.
Law Points
- Labour Court may correct accidental omission or mistake in award under Section 6(6) of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
- even after award becomes final
- correction does not amount to review or appeal
- interpretation of 'accidental omission' is not limited to slips of the pen but includes omission to deal with a matter referred.
