Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

33. At this stage, it is necessary to remember that a Tribunal constituted under the I.D. Act is not a Court. It has to deal with the material that is placed before it, which may not be strictly "evidence" as understood by the Indian Evidence Act. There should be material placed before the Tribunal. This is clear from the observations of the Apex Court in Food Corporation of India Workers' Union v. Food Corporation of India and another, . It is also necessary to bear in mind that while construing the provisions of the Items mentioned in the Fourth Schedule, read with section 9-A of the I.D. Act, the Court has to adopt a liberal construction, as was done by the Apex Court in the case between (M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. and The Workmen and others), 1972(II) L.L.J., 259. In para 15, at page 266, the Apex Court has observed that in order to effectively achieve the object underlying section 9-A, it would be more appropriate to place on the Fourth Schedule read with section 9-A, a construction liberal enough to include change of weekly rest day from Sunday to some other week day.

43. I have already referred in para 33 above to the decision of the Apex Court in M/s Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. and The Workmen and others 1972(2) L.L.J. 259 where the view taken is that the Court has to put a liberal construction on the wording used in the Fourth Schedule read with section 9-A of the I.D. Act so as to effectively achieve the object underlying of section 9-A of the Act. The Apex Court was concerned with the change in the weekly day of rest which change was effected without complying with the provisions of section 9-A and such change was, therefore, held to be ineffective. Similarly in the case of The Workmen of the Food Corporation of India v. M/s. Food Corporation of India, , it was held that the abolition of the contract system and the introduction of direct payment system brought about a basic qualitative change in the relationship between the Corporation and the workmen engaged for handling food grains. On the disappearance of the intermediary contractor, a direct relationship of master and servant came into existence between the Corporation and the workmen. Once the workman had become the workman of the Corporation, it was not open to the Corporation to induct a contractor and treat its workmen as workmen of the contractor. It was, therefore, held that after introducing the direct payment system agreed to between the parties, if the Corporation or the employer wanted to introduce a change in respect of any of the matters set out in Fourth Schedule, it was obligatory to give a notice of change. Any change without complying with the provisions of section 9-A would be illegal inviting penal action under section 31(2) of I.D. Act.