Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.30 seconds)
The Secretary, Tiruchengode Mill ... vs The Industrial Tribunal And Anr. on 11 December, 1963 cites

Buckingham And Carnatic Co. Ltd vs Workers Of The Buckingham Andcarnatic ... on 2 December, 1952

6. The matter is certainly not quite an easy one to decide. Mr. M.R. Narayanaswami, learned Counsel for the Management, referred to another decision of the Supreme Court Buckingham Carnatic Company v. Its Workers . In that case, there was an illegal strike. The question was whether by reason of that strike the workers lost their right to the benefit of the holidays they would have otherwise got under the leave rules of the mill. The question arose under Section 49-B(1) of the Factories Act. The Industrial Tribunal to whom the disputes had been referred held that the continuity of service was broken by the interruption caused by the illegal strike and that as a consequence the workers who had participated in such a strike were not entitled to the annual holidays with pay. On appeal, the Labour Appellate Tribunal was of the view that the strike did not cause any interruption in the workers' service and it was ordered that holidays at full rates should be given to the workers. The management appealed and contended before the Supreme Court that continuity of service was broken by the interruption caused by the illegal strike and that the workers were not entitled to annual holidays under Section 49-B(1), inasmuch as they would not have completed the period of twelve months continuous service in the factory and that the non permitted absence as a result o f the concerted refusal to work even for two to four hours in the course of a working day amounts to an illegal strike and consequently an interruption of service of the workers. This contention was accepted by their Lordships. It may be mentioned that Section 49-B of the Factories Act provided for holidays with pay if the worker had completed a period of twelve months continuous service in a factory. The Explanation to that section allowed the taking into account of sickness or other leave periods, but excluded any strike which was an illegal strike. The principle underlying the relevant sections which their Lordships had to construe are almost similar to the provisions of the Festivals and Holidays Act now in question. Their Lordships took the view that this interruption by the illegal strike caused a breach in the continuity of service or the continuous service that was required.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 58 - M C Mahajan - Full Document
1