text stringlengths 5 5.67k |
|---|
These are the only questions which 34 arise in regard to the decisions of the Wage Board. Ratio |
[Bhagwati, J. They say it is contrary to the principles of natural justice audi alteram partem.] That is a maxim about which we have heard so much. Ratio |
It has, no application to this case of delegated legislation. Ratio |
[Bhagwati, J. Can it not be urged, having regard to section 11, that the Legislature did not contemplate that the Wage Board was to function as delegated authority because it gives the choice of the provisions of the being followed by the Board ?] No, even for a subordinate legislative authority there are procedures to... |
[Kapur, J. Is it not necessary to hear everybody who may be affected by the decisions of the Board ?] No question of hearing arises. Ratio |
It is a question of a subordinate legislative authority gathering such information as it wants and it is obliged to take into consideration all the relevant circumstances. Ratio |
Certiorari and prohibition lie only in respect of judicial or quasi judicial acts. Ratio |
(Halsbury 's Laws of England, 3rd Edn. Ratio |
11, p. 55, para. Ratio |
The principle audi alteram partem also applies only to judicial or quasi judicial proceedings. Ratio |
(Patterson vs Dist. Ratio |
Commr. Ratio |
of Accrator, For a distinction between judicial and legislative functions, See Cooley 's Constitutional Limitations, 8th Edn. Ratio |
Vol. 1, p. 185; Prentis vs Atlantic Coast Co. Ltd., ; , 226 227, Per Holmes J.; Mitchell Coal Co. vs Pennsylvania, 57 L. Ed. 1479, 1482; Louisville and Nashville Railroad Co. vs Green Garrett, ; , 239). Ratio |
The functions of the Wage Board in the United Kingdom have been characterised by writers as legislative in character. Ratio |
(Robson 's Justice and Administrative Law, 3rd Edn. Ratio |
p. 608; Griffith 's Principles of Administrative Law, p. 39; Barbara Wootton, Social Foundations of Wage Policy, Modern methods of 35 Wage determination, p. 88). Ratio |
This is also the case in Australia. Ratio |
(Federated Saw Mills Case; , ; Australian Boot Trade Employees Federation vs Whybrow and Co., ; , 289, 317, per Isaacs, J.). Ratio |
The Labour and Industry Act, 1953, of Victoria (Australia) in section 39 (2) gives statutory recognition to the decisions in 8 C. L. R. 365 and ; , by providing that every determination shall have force, validity and effect as if enacted in the Act. Ratio |
The very constitution of the Wage Board under the impugned Act, with an equal number of representatives of employers and employees with an independent chairman is against its being judicial or quasi judicial in character, for, no man should be judge in his own cause. Ratio |
(Franklin vs Minister of Town and Country Planning, ; , 103). Ratio |
It is incorrect to infer that once the Wage Board is constituted under section 8 of the Act the power of the Government under the Act is exhausted and nothing more can be done. Ratio |
The power to constitute the Board can by virtue of section 14 of the , be used from time to time as the occasion demands. Ratio |
There was nothing wrong in the Central Government reconstituting the Board on the resignation of Shri K. P. Keshava Menon. Ratio |
The decision by majority is provided by Rules framed by the Central Government under section 20 of the Act which became a part of the Act. Ratio |
Hence a decision by a majority in conformity with the Rules under the Act cannot be impeached. Ratio |
(Pacific States Box and Basketing Co. vs White, ; ; Under section II of the Act the Wage Board "may" exercise the powers and follow the procedure laid down under the . Ratio |
There is nothing to warrant the provision being read as obligatory or mandatory. Ratio |
The provisions of the are basically enacted for the adjudication of disputes between two parties and they are on 36 their face inapplicable to the Wage Board. Ratio |
That is precisely why the Board was given the option to exercise some of the powers conferred by the or to follow procedures prescribed in that Act. Ratio |
It is not incumbent under the Act on the Wage Board to give any reasons for its decisons. Ratio |
The Board would be perfectly within its right if it chose not to give any reasons. Ratio |
While judging the reasonableness of the wage structure for the whole industry it would be entirely fallacious to see how it hit a particular newspaper or a unit. Ratio |
Multiple units or chains could be classified on the basis of the total gross revenues of all the constituent units because economies would be possible in group operations resulting in the reduction of the cost of production. Ratio |
There is nothing in the Act which prohibits the Wage Board from grouping into chains or multiple units. Ratio |
Further, there is nothing in the Act to prohibit the treating of several newspaper establish ments publishing one or more newspapers though in different parts of the country as one establishment for fixing rates of wages. Ratio |
Some sort of classification was inevitable when the newspaper establishments all over the country had to be considered for fixing the rates of wages. Ratio |
If the Wage Board adopted gross revenue as a workable basis for classification there was nothing wrong and that fact could not vitiate its decision. Ratio |
Profits of newspaper establishments were vague and difficult to ascertain as many things are mixed up in calculating profit. Ratio |
It would be dangerous to go by the profit and loss of individual concerns to ascertain their capacity to pay. Ratio |
Even the Bank Award has taken the "turnover" or the aggregate resources as the basis of the classification. Ratio |
The basis of gross revenue was the only proper and convenient method of ascertaining the actual status of a newspaper establishment for fixing a wage structure. Ratio |
Wage structure recommended by the Board would show that compared with the scales and salaries obtaining now in many of the newspaper Ratio |
establishments the scales given by the Board were not exorbitant or 37 unreasonable. Ratio |
What is to be considered is the industry region wise and not individual units. Ratio |
It may be that individual units may suffer hardship or even go out of existence but that would not be a relevant consideration. Ratio |
[Gajendragadkar, J. If the decisions are to be attacked effectively under article 19(1)(g), petitioners have to show that A or B or C class of paper will cease to exist, or, taken as a class they cannot bear the burden.] That is the way the matter should be approached. Ratio |
The figures in individual statements of the petitioners furnish no evidence whatsoever of the unreasonableness of the wage fixation. Ratio |
The decision is given retrospective effect from the date of constitution of the Board. Ratio |
The Act itself in section 13 contemplates interim relief. Ratio |
Instead of granting any interim relief the Board decided to give retrospective effect to its decision. Ratio |
A.V. Viswanatha Sastri, section Viswanathan, B. R. L. lyengar, J. B. Dadachanji, section N. Andley and Rameshwar Nath, for respondent No. 3 in Petition No. 91 of 1957. Ratio |
The balance sheets and profit and loss accounts of the petitioner company for several years when analysed show that with normally prudent management the earnings of the Indian Express group of newspapers admit of payment to working journalists on the scale fixed by the Wage Board and the decision of the Wage Board was ... |
N. C. Chatterjee, A. section R. Chari, section Viswanathan,A. N. Sinha, J. B. Dadachanji, section N. Andley and Rameshwar Nath, for the Indian Federation of Working Journalists in all the Petitions, and for the ]Delhi Union of Journalists in Petition No. 103 of 1957. Ratio |
It is open to Parliament to delegate to the Wage Board the power to legislate with regard to certain subjects. Ratio |
The so called decision of the Wage Board was a valid exercise of such power by a subordinate legislative body functioning under specified conditions under Parliamentary mandate with the limits prescribed by the Constitution. Ratio |
38 Even if the Wage Board is held to be a quasijudicial body, it acted according to the principle of audi alteram partem and no prerogative writ should be issued to disturb findings arrived at by such a body. Ratio |
M. K. Nambiar, in reply. Ratio |
The Wage Board was not intended to exercise powers of legislation but those of a judicial nature. Ratio |
Under section 10 of the Working Journalist, , Act the Board has to make a "decision", and this term has been used in several enactments to indicate a determination by a judicial tribunal. Ratio |
Under section 8 the decision of the Board has to be made in accordance with the provisions of the Act and therefore the Board had the function of applying the law and not making a law. Ratio |
The Wage 'Board is required under section 11 to adopt the law procedure as is adopted by Industrial Tribunal. ,. Ratio |
The decision of the Board is declared to be binding only on some persons and not all. Ratio |
It can be executed in the same manner as the award of an Industrial Tribunal. Ratio |
Its character is identical to that of an award made by an industrial tribunal and the Supreme Court has held that a tribunal does not exercise legislative functions. Ratio |
Parliament did not intend to confer any powers of subordinate legislation on the Board. Ratio |
This is clear from the rules of business of the Lok Sabha read with the Statement of Objects and Reasons to the Bill. Ratio |
In, the memorandum regarding delegated legislation appended to the Bill the constitution of the Wage Board in the matter of fixation of wages had not been shown as a piece of delegated legislation. Ratio |
(The Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha (1957) Rule 70). Ratio |
The decision of the Wage Board was not to be laid before both the Houses of Parliament. Ratio |
This would have been so had the fixation of wages by the Board was a delegated legislation (laid Rule 317). Ratio |
The Wage Board was not constituted as sub legislative authority. Ratio |
The question is not what the legislature could have enacted but whether by virtue of powers of the Wage Board under the Act as enacted, it is a legislative body or a tribunal with adjudicators functions The Board does not possess any powers of delegated legislation, It has been given all the trappings which 39 were nec... |
In interpreting the Act the Court is entitled to take into consideration the surrounding circumstances, the object of the legislation and also whether a particular term used in legislation was considered by the legislature at the time of enactment. Ratio |
The court ought to take into consideration the entire background and the effect of dropping of the term "minimum" from the enactment. Ratio |
The Press Commission had directed its attention exclusively to the question of fixing minimum wage and the Act in section 9 followed the pattern and purported to implement the recommendations of the Press Commission. Ratio |
The Press Commission in considering minimum wage ignored the capacity to pay. Ratio |
The Act, similarly, being based on the Report of the Press Commission has made no provision for considering the capacity to pay. Ratio |
This omission which was appropriate with regard to minimum wages rendered the fixation of wages at a different level unreasonable and therefore void. Ratio |
The content of the term "minimum wage" would not be changed by merely calling it a "statutory" minimum. Ratio |
Section 14 of the , can apply if the enactment does not rule it out by necessary implication. Ratio |
The entire scheme of the impugned Act shows that only one Wage Board and one decision is contemplated. Ratio |
It is not open to the Government to reconstitute the Wage Board as and when they desire. Ratio |
Munshi, in reply. Ratio |
Whether or not the Act imposes a direct burden, the Court should see if the Act is a special law singling out an industry for laying the burden on it. Ratio |
If it does so, as in the present Act, it will amount to a direct burden. Ratio |
If it is a general law it would not be a direct burden. Ratio |
The Act stands alone in being arbitrary and excessive and is without parallel in any other country. Ratio |
The Act is unique in that (1) it provides for gratuity even on voluntary resignation. Ratio |
(2) it gives power to the Wage Board to fix indeterminate wages investing them with attributes of minimum wages, and (3) it confers on the Board power to fix wages (i) without specifying 40 essential standards, (ii) without casting a duty to follow a reasonable procedure, (iii) without any control by an appellate tribu... |
In other countries there are various safeguards and checks against arbitrary wage decisions. Ratio |
(U. K. Wage Councils Act, 1945; U. section Fair Labour Standards Act, 1938; Factories and Shops Act, 1905, new Act of 1928 of Victoria, Australia). Ratio |
If the mechanism of the Act itself is such that it is unreasonably restrictive of rights to trade then the Act has to be struck down as void under article 19 (1)(g). Ratio |
Even if it is held that there was no excessive delegation, it is still open to the Court to see whether the restrictions impinged on the Constitutional safeguards tinder article 19 (1)(g). Ratio |
Fixation of scales of wages on the basis of grossrevenue without taking into account the liability of newspapers is a devastating doctrine in industrial relations. Ratio |
The Wage Board is not a sub legislative body; but even if it is, it has to act judicially and is subject to writs of certiorari. Ratio |
Even if its decisions become assimilated in the Act it must be considered to be a quasi judicial body, since it is expected to carry out a preliminary investigation before recording its findings. Ratio |
The functions of the Wage Board cannot be characterised either exclusively legislative or exclusively judicial. Ratio |
The functions performed by administrative agencies do not fall in water tight compartments. Ratio |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.