Case: Rajendra Mills, Limited Vs. Its Workmen

Of the several matters earlier in controversy between the parties only one remains now for consideration in this appeal by the employer against an order of the Labour Appellate Tribunal of India, Bombay. By this order the Labour Appellate Tribunal decided in confirmation of the award of the industrial tribunal that dearness; allowance for reelers shall not be linked with Production by them and shall be independent thereof. As regards the reelers the industrial tribunal had held that neither basic wages nor dearness allowance should be linked with production but that in case the workload applicable to these workmen was not reached by any individual reeler, it was open to the employer to take appropriate disciplinary action. On appeal by the employer the Appellate Tribunal set aside the above direction of the first tribunal as regards the basic wages, but as indicated above confirmed its award as regards dearness allowance.

Reasoning:
Even apart, however, from the question whether in the reeling department itself dearness allowance had before the date of agreement in June 1951 been linked with production or independent of production the undoubted and admitted position is that in other departments of this very company dearness allowance toworkers was independent of production. As we have mentioned earlier, this fact was (sic) taken with the further fact that dearness allowance in all the departments wheresystem is in vogue will remain independent of production, practically neutralizes in the present case and for the present employer the argument that logic requires that on asystem dearness allowance must be linked with production.Learned counsel for the appellant drew our attention to the provisions of S.25C of the industrial disputes Act and some provisions of the Payment of Wages Act and argued that these show the view of the legislature that dearness allowance should be linked with the amount of work done. We think it unnecessary in the present case to express any opinion whether there is any force in this contention; for in the peculiar circumstances of this case where the employer himself appears to have based his case wholly on the agreement which is no longer in force and his conduct has shown that there is no real difficulty in working on asystem when dearness allowance is being linked with production, we are of opinion that we shall not be justified in interfering with the decision of the tribunals below that the dearness allowance should remain independent of production.