Subject NOT available

click here for IIIF manifest

REGISTERED NO. D-28.

The Gazette of India

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

NEW DELHI, TUESDAY. NOVEMBER 32, 1949

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF LABOUR

NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the I2th/14th November, 1949

No. LR-2(182) I. - In pursuance of section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Ad, 1947 (XIV of 1947), the Central Government is pleased to publish the following award of the Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta, in the industrial dispute between the workmen of the Barasat Basirhat Light Railway and the manage- ment, namely, Messrs Roy and Company Limited, Calcutta.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT CALCUTTA.

REFERENCE NO 4 OF 1949

Before F. Jeejeebhoy, Barrister-at-Law, Chairman

Parties—The "Workmen employed in the Barasat Basirhal Light Railway.

,

AND

Their Employers, represented by the Managing Agents Messrs. Roy & Co., Ltd., 22, Canning Street, Calcutta

APPEARANCES

For the Workmen : Sri Paritosh Banerjee and Sri J. N Mitra;

For the Company: Sri S. C. Sen (Counsel) and Sri N. Das Gupta.

AWARD

By Notification No LR-2 (192) I, dated 27th July 1949, the industrial dispute between the workmen employed in the Barasat Basirhat Light Railway and the management, namely, Messrs. Roy & Co , Ltd , Calcutta, was referred to this Tribunal for adjudication.

As it had been previously agreed that my award in the Martins Light Railways Reference would generally apply to this Railway on all points therein decided, the following issues for trial were framed by consent:

ISSUES

(1) What should be the Dearness Allowance payable to the staff.

(2319)

(2) As regards Provident Fund:

(a) Is the Provident Fund benefit and gratuity calculated from the date of the appointment of the employee; and if not, is any change desirable.

(b) II

(o) Should tho staff be supplied with copies of their individual statemenbs of aocount and if so, at what intervals.

(3) Was Satish Das, S. M., wrongfully dismissed as the result of unfair labour practice and is he entitled to any relief.

(4) Has there been any violation of agreement between the Company and the Union regarding the recruitment of outsiders in preference to existing and old staff; if BO, what order should be passed in this matter.

(5) Should there be any orders passod regarding the abolition of the con- tract system of labour.

The first issue relates to the payment of Dearness Allowance to the staff. At the inception of this Reference Sri Sen stated that generally speaking the award (to be published) in the Martins Light .Railway dispute would apply ic this adjudication, subioct to certain limitation as regards the Company'a capacity to pay. The Martins Light Railways award has now been duly -published, and Sri Sen asks that in view o£ the present financial position of the Company, the application of that award as to Dearness Allowance should be defered for one year.

On 26-9-49. L fixed this case for hearing on the 24lh of October 1949, thus giving the parties amplo time to prepare for trial. As the employers pleaded financial incapacity to implement the award as regards Dearness Allowance for a period of one year, the burden rjaturally lay upon them to establish that owing to financial difficulties they were unable to start paying the enhanced Dearness Allowance from the date on which the Martins Light Railways have been directed to pay it. When the hearing started on 24th October 1949 it became obvious that the employers did not have ready the requisite facts and figures to support their claim; accounts were produoed for the period ending fiOth September 1948, aud even as to the last six months of this period there are no auditod accounts, tho accounts for the most relevant period of tho last one year were not available. At the request of Sri Rftn I pave two days further time for the production of such accounts; but when the hearing was resumed on the 27th October 1949, the accounts were still not forthcoming and further time was requested, winch was refused, as £ was ielt that the employers were trifling with the time and the patience of L Tribunal, specially as I had arranged for the attendance of a Chartered Accountant o examine the accounts. Either the accounts were no m order or the employers were reluctant to produce them, and this Tribunal was not prepared to countenance suoh an attitude.

T hold that the employ era have failed to prove financial incapacity as stated itw them and I direct that the Dearness Allowance shall be paid by the employers in exactly the same manner as ordered in the Award of the Martins Light'Railway³-

In tho result it is ordered that the Martins Light Railways award published in Gazette of India ttxtruordinary dated 5th September 1949 at pages 1588 to 1559 shall apply to the disputes between the parties hereto as to all similar matters determined by that award.

Iisue No. (2): This concern was boing managed by Martin & Co. oa Managing Agents. It was takon over by the present management last on the 1st November 194.8. The Provident Fund of the employees with Martin & Co. has not howe\ei yet been transferred to the new management. 1 am told that there is a trust deed for the management and protection o£ the Provident Fund, and that negotiations are now afoot with Martin & Co. for the execution of a fresh trust deed and for the transfer of the assots of the Provident Fund to the now trustees. In the meantime the Provident Fund moneys have been accumulating with the new management, and they have not been keeping these moneys apart from their other funds. This is a moat unsatis- factory state ot affairs.

I direct that early stops be taken to vest the Provident Fund in propor trustees for the benefit of the subscribers to tho fund; that the terms of the Provident Fund shall not bo altered to the detriment of tho subscribers; and that the Trust deed do provide for the appointment of responsible trustees to take charge of and manage tho Provident Fund. The Trust deed shall provide that all current moneys, securities, documents of title, and valuables ot the Provident Fund shall be deposited in and shall romain at all times in the custody of the Imperial Bank. It is also ordered that all monevs accumulated with the present management on account of the Provident Fund, and all monoys to aecruo to the fund until the new trustees are duly vested with tho Provident Fund, shall bo forthwith deposited into a Provident Fund account in tho Imperial Bank. The employers are warned that tho Provident l'und money is trust money and must be treated as suoh, and should not be mixed up with the funds of the Company.

It is ordered that each workman shall receive in the fires week of January eveiy year a statement of his provident fund account.

Ixsue A'o (0): This Lssue rotates to the dismissal of one Satish "Das, a station master in the employ of the Company. He was suspended on the 20th October 1948 without any allowance or pay, and was given a Charge bheet (Fx V) on 16-12-48. An enquiry was conducted into the charges by M r 'N K Hose, the then General Manager of tho Company who gave his decision on 11-8-49, to the following effect-.-that 8. C. Da* be granted half pay for the period under suspension, and that "he be taken off suspension and posted to another station." This order was not communicated to 8. G. Das, and in fact nothing further was done until S. C. Das sent a lawyer s nohce complaining about his being kept under suspension for so long, ojperio,i There- upon the Company informed Das B p eader by letter of 18th Juty(T^- ^ that his services were dispensed with with immediate effect S. C, Das was an active member of the Union of 20 years standing; and he now claims back pay and reinstatement.

Now it is not my function a. u Tribunal to substitute my own judgment for 'the ludgment of those who are required to make decisions on questions of misconduct But it is certainly my function to interfere if there has been anv violation of the principles oi natural justice. In this case I have carefully perused all the papers, and it is difficult for me to understand on what basis the considered decision of the General Manager haB been set aside. I waa shown a short order of about ten words by which a Director of the Company, on receipt of the lawyer'a notice^ forthwith decided to discharge Das who had

80 yoars service in tho Oompauy to his credit. I havo no doubt that such order prooeeded more from a sense ot annoyance than from aiiy calm consi- deration of Das's case. The fact remains that tho offences aliened to have been committed in September and October 1948 tvere investigated in January 1949, and were the subject of the General Manager's decision in March 1949. Nothing thereafter was done until tho unfortunate man pent the lawyer's notice; and then ho was promptly dismissed, hi tl,e moanwhilo for the whole period of suspension Das was receiving no subsistence allowance and had no means of livelihood.

This Bailway was being managed by Martins until it was taken over with its staff by the present management in September 194R According to the procedure of Martins Light Railway enquires were expeditious, and. a person under suspension was always given subsidence allowance, generally haif pay and Dcarness Allowance.

1 hold that S 0 Das 1ms been the victim ot tin innistieo, and it is just that the Tribunal should intervene. The order of the General Manager is on the- faoc of it reasonable, and 1 hold (hat theio is uo MI I id considered" order to tho contrary of which iliis Tiibunal can take notice. The investigation was pro- perly conduoted by the General Manager and I have no intention of substituting my own judgment for his or altering his decision m a matter of this kind. 1 therefore make the following ordei in this case-—I adopt the decision of tho then Geneial Manager of the Railway as stated in Ex 2(o). I direct that S. C. Das shall he deemed to have been under suspension on half pay and allowances for the period from 20-10-48 to 11-3-49 forenoon. He shall be- deemed to have been released from suspension and reinstated in service on full pay as and from 11-3-40, and ^hall be entitled to full pay and allowances from 11-0-49 to date. S. (' Das shall be reinstated to the same status and pay as at the time of suspension.

Isaue No, (4): It has been said by the workmen that there was an agree- ment with Mart/m & Co. that 80 per cent of new appointments should go to the sons and relatives of woikmeu. The present management, whilo disputing the existence of such an agreement, said that tht-y are quvto prepared to give priority to the sony of workmen, all things being equal. This is reasonable enough. It has also been alleged that outsiders are taken into the higher grades although persons in lower grades are ripe for promotion and it is pointed out that 16 T. T. F!s were appointed from outside on a rixed salary of Its. 60 a month, thereby creating a discrepancy of unequal pay for the same class of work. Sri Sen for the Company contended that existing staff is always entitled to promotion if found suitable I feel howevor that on this subject the employ- ers have acted improperly in that they have not g'ven sufficient chances of promotion to the existing staff when making appointments to iho higher grades. Parties agree that on this issue I should make the same order as T havo made on Issue No. 10 in tho Martins Light Railway award, namely:

"There is no contest that other things being equal the next senior man should be selected for promotion; but m my opinion it would be detrimental to discipline and efficiency if promotions werfc) orderod to proceed on seniority alone. I think that the following directions should provide an adequate guide:

(a) Other things being equal promotion is to be madb by seniority but if a workman is not to be promoted by seniority, the final' orders of the Managing Agents shall first be obtained Before promotion is made, or in order to confirm promotion, the Management shall bo entitled to be satisfied as to tho fitness of a vorkman for promotion, if necessary by individual tests relating to the work

whioh he will be required to do. Ii the Departmental Head does not propose to promote the next senior man he shall inform him ttiereoi, m which case the latter shall bo entitled to make a representation to the Directors through the Works Committee OJ direct il he so likes. Such representation shall be made forth- with so that the decision ot the Directors may not be delated. I ke President or the Secretary oi the Union may also interview the Managing Director concerning such promotion but betore final oidera aie passed. (1 do not iavoui Llie idea oi the management stating in writing the reabona lor supersession, and the Union agrees with me tnat it may piejudice the workman's iuture).

(bj Wherever Government certificates ate inquired, they shall be con- sidered essential lor appointmetit or promotion.

(c) Normally, promotions will bo within the same Department, but per- SOUB in the ompioy o± the Company shall be given chanoeb oi transfers when vacancies occur ^suDjeot to the claims ot tho&o within the Department)".

issue No. (D) : JJhere are two stations on this Bailway Kazipara and K.artiek- pur, both llag stations, wnere tno Company keeps a porter aa & permanent employee and a contractor as the booliing clerk. ±hu conLiactor is paid Jtlb. 15 ab auovvanco ana a commission oi 10 poi cent, on tut, sale oi tickcos, and this piactice naa boon in existence since i9By. Xho vvoikman contend that this uontractor should be eliminated and should, be replaced by a whole time work- man. 1 douut U the worlmion are entitled to make a oiaiin ot this kind—but apait xiom that it in doubtiui u any change at present would be juatmed. xuese two stations woio opened at the roquet>t oi the public, and are not strictly remunerative, ihe monthly sales oi tickets at tneae stations as wull as goods bookings are hmited. It tne Company is compelled to place a wnole- tirno employee at these stations, there win t>e the temptation to close down these stations as an unremunorative propositions, to tho inconvenience oi the public, in these circumstances i do not think that any older on this issue is indicated.

Copy oi Exhibit 2(c) is attached to this award.

NOW, TUEHKFORM, MllB TRIBUNAL, MAKES ITS AWAUO IN TKKMS AF0BKSA1D, TSiS i'HB BOTH DAY OF OOT(f-^K 1 0 4 9.

F. JEEJBKBHOY,

Chairman^

Central Government Industrial Tribunal at Calcutta*

EXHIBIT 2(O;.

Finding i

Having considered all tkd evidence, I find:-*

That Mr. -s3. C. Das, Station Master, Beliaghata Bridge is responsible for booking a large number of consignments oi Halt and Bidi Leaves on 9th October 1948, in the iaoe of written orders and Messages from the Tramd Inspector, Shambazar forbidding him to do so. Due to the E. I. Li. having imposed a restriction at Baraset against acceptance of these goods, this Kailway was saddled with the protection of same from weather and from pilierage.

iVote On the finding and recommendation.—

While the Station Master, B. C. Das is responsible for the booking of Salt and Bidi Leaf consignments against the Trafttc Inspector's instructions and

under strong influence of the Merchants concerned, there are some extenuating oiroumstances as follows: —

(1) The Station Master was not made aware of the restrictions imposed by the 0. & T. Ey. against the through booking of these goods to stations in its jurisdiction. Further the Circular issued by the 13. I. E. allotting quotas to different railways for booking oi Bait was not brought to his knowledge.

(2) The Station Master had receivod permission from Martin's Eailways to 6ocept such consignments on receipt of advice from the Traffic Inspector that there were no restrictions or operational difficulties. The T. I. did not clear up this matter, although pressed by the Station Master. Please see letter E 257 of 24-6-48 to S. M., Beliaghata Bridge attached herewith.

(8) Prior to 9-10-48, some consignments had been accepted by the E. I. E. at Baraset and this fact would mislead S. C. Sen.

(4) The part played by Mr. J. C. Eoy, Traffics Inspector, in handling the situation, laoked in energy. He should have made personal contact with the Traffic Officer of Martin's Kailways and appraised him fully as to what was about to happen.

(5) S. 0. Das has consistently maintained that he was not doing anything prejudicial to the interests of the Railway, On the other hand he was securing for the Eailway, additional earnings.

In the light of the above considerations, 1 recommend that:

(1) Half pay be granted to S. 0. Das for the period he has been under suspension.

(2) That he be taken off suspension and posted to another Station.

SD. N. £. BOBK,

General Manager,

Baraset-Basirhat Light Ely. Co., Ltd,

11-8-49.

N. Cf KUPPUSWAMI,

Under Secretary to th^Oovernment of India.

PUBLISHED BY T HI MANAGER O PUBLICATIONS, DELHI, INDIA FEINTED BT THE MANAGES, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA PHBBB, N BW DELHI, INDIA.