Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Pix Transmissions Limited, an employer, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order of reference dated 21.1.2010 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Labour, Nagpur (respondent no. 2). The reference referred the dispute to the Industrial Tribunal, Nagpur, on the question whether members of the Maharashtra General Kamgar Union working in the petitioner's establishment were entitled to payment of minimum wages as per notification dated 16.4.2007 with arrears. The employer contended that the entire controversy was not placed before the Industrial Court, and that the demand for minimum wages was erroneous because wages were already being paid at a rate higher than the minimum wages under a settlement dated 14.8.2006. That settlement was for three years and contained a clause prohibiting the union from raising any financial demand. The employer argued that there was no industrial dispute as defined in Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The High Court issued notice on 28.10.2010, admitted the matter on 9.6.2011, and stayed further proceedings in Reference (IDA) No. 1 of 2010, but directed the employer to file a written statement before the authority, which was done. The court considered the submissions of the parties. The court held that the settlement cannot bar the statutory right to minimum wages, and the reference was valid. The petition was dismissed, and the Industrial Tribunal was directed to proceed with the reference expeditiously.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Reference of Dispute - Validity - Section 2(k), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The employer challenged the reference of a dispute regarding minimum wages to the Industrial Tribunal on the ground that a settlement dated 14.8.2006 barred financial demands. The Court held that the settlement cannot preclude the statutory right to minimum wages under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, and the reference was valid as an industrial dispute existed. (Paras 1-3)
B) Industrial Law - Minimum Wages - Statutory Right - Settlement - The Court observed that the claim for minimum wages is a statutory right and cannot be waived by a settlement. The reference to the Tribunal was proper as the dispute fell within the definition of industrial dispute under Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Additional Commissioner of Labour erred in referring the dispute regarding minimum wages to the Industrial Tribunal despite a settlement barring financial demands, and whether the reference was valid under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the reference was valid and the settlement cannot bar the statutory right to minimum wages. The Industrial Tribunal was directed to proceed with the reference expeditiously.
Law Points
- Industrial Dispute
- Minimum Wages
- Settlement Bar
- Reference Validity
- Section 2(k) Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (09) 94
Writ Petition No. 5308 of 2010
B.P. Dharmadhikari, A.P. Bhangale
V.R. Thakur, H.V. Thakur for petitioner; A.R. Taiwade for respondents 1,2,4; M.V. Mohokar for respondent 3
Pix Transmissions Limited
State of Maharashtra, Additional Commissioner of Labour, Maharashtra General Kamgar Union, Member, Industrial Tribunal
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order of reference of an industrial dispute to the Industrial Tribunal.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner employer sought to quash the order of reference dated 21.1.2010 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Labour referring the dispute regarding minimum wages to the Industrial Tribunal.
Filing Reason
The employer contended that the reference was invalid because a settlement dated 14.8.2006 barred financial demands and the wages paid were already above minimum wages, hence no industrial dispute existed.
Previous Decisions
The Additional Commissioner of Labour passed the order of reference on 21.1.2010. The High Court issued notice on 28.10.2010, admitted the petition on 9.6.2011, and stayed proceedings in Reference (IDA) No. 1 of 2010, directing the employer to file a written statement.
Issues
Whether the reference of the dispute regarding minimum wages to the Industrial Tribunal was valid despite the existence of a settlement barring financial demands.
Whether the dispute fell within the definition of 'industrial dispute' under Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner employer argued that the entire controversy was not placed before the Industrial Court, and the demand for minimum wages was erroneous as wages were paid at a rate higher than minimum wages under a settlement dated 14.8.2006, which contained a clause prohibiting the union from raising financial demands.
The employer further argued that there was no industrial dispute as defined in Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Ratio Decidendi
A settlement barring financial demands cannot preclude the statutory right to minimum wages under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The claim for minimum wages constitutes an industrial dispute under Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the reference to the Tribunal was valid.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioneremployer has filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order of Reference dated 21.1.2010 passed by respondent no. 2 and referring the controversy to the Industrial Tribunal, Nagpur.
The challenge raised is basically on the ground that entire controversy as presented to respondent no. 2 has not been placed for consideration before the Industrial Court and petitioner/employer is, therefore, precluded from pointing out that the demand of minimum wages as raised is itself erroneous and misconceived.
Procedural History
The Additional Commissioner of Labour passed the order of reference on 21.1.2010. The employer filed Writ Petition No. 5308 of 2010 in the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. Notice was issued on 28.10.2010, and the petition was admitted on 9.6.2011. Proceedings in Reference (IDA) No. 1 of 2010 were stayed, but the employer was directed to file a written statement before the authority, which was done. The High Court then heard the matter and delivered judgment on 20/21 September 2011.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: Section 2(k)
