CHENNAI: In a significant judgment having far reaching consequences, the Madras High Court has reiterated its earlier ruling that the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be invoked by the government to declare holidays for factories and industries for the death of national leaders.
Even though former Indian President APJ Abdul Kalam was said to have expressed his wish to the government not to declare a holiday on his death, instead to work an extra day if the people loved him, as a mark of respect to the death of Kalam, who died on July 27, 2015, the state government issued a GO on July 28 announcing that July 30 would be a public holiday for all educational Institutions and government/private establishments under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
And the management of many industries, including Bimetal Bearings Limited in Perandapalli village in Krishnagiri district, had declared holiday to the workers on July 30, subject to the condition that the
second and third shift workers should work on August 2, 2015. However, the workers availed the holiday on July 30, but did not turn up for duty on August 2. The Bimetal management announced the wage cut under the `no work no pay' policy. The workers union moved the Labour Court in Salem, which on November 14, 2017, quashed the wage cut order of the management. Hence, the present appeal against the labour court order.
Allowing the petition, Justice S M Subramaniam said that the GO is inapplicable to private companies, which are all otherwise governed by the provisions of the Factories Act. The petitioner management even on July 30, 2015 had orally informed to the union men that that they would be able to declare a holiday only for the general shift and first shift as a mark of respect to the former President Abdul Kalam.
As far as the workers of the second shift and third shift concerned, an alternate suggestion and a concession was provided for in the event of agreeing to work on August 2, the Management was prepared to declare holiday for second shift and third shift on July 30. "Considering the facts and the circumstances, this court is of the considered opinion that declaring a holiday by the government under the Negotiable Instruments Act, would not be directly applicable to private companies falling under the Factories Act.
Thus, it is to be construed that the management granted a concession for the workers of the second shift and third shift, enabling them to avail holiday on July 30, provided they agree to work on August 2. It is only an alternate concession provided to the workmen of the second shift and third shift. Such a concession can never be construed as a legal right, so as to arrive a conclusion that the workers of the second shift and third shift are entitled for a holiday as per the GO, which was issued under the Negotiable Instruments Act. So also the said concession would not form a pre-existing right for the purpose of filing a claim petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947," the judge said.
A concession is a form of “privilege”. A concession is nothing but a conditional right. A “privilege” or a “concessional right” cannot be interpreted as an absolute right, which alone would constitute a right
to file a claim petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The term “right” in Civil Society is defined to mean that “which a person is entitled to have or to do or to receive from others, within the limits prescribed by law”. Thus, such a concession or conditional right offered cannot be construed as an absolute right for the purpose of claiming a pre-existing right, enabling the workers to file the claim petition under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the judge added and quashed the Labour Court award dated November 14, 2017.