Madras High Court Judgement on payment of wages to employees who absented on poll day

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.12.2014
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN
Writ Petition Nos.17710 of 2004 and
16368 of 2006

M/s.Raptakos Brett Employees' Union
Rep. by its General Secretary R.Jaikumar
New No.142, Velachery Road,Guindy, Chennai - 600 042. ... Petitioner in both WPs
                                vs.
1.M/s.Raptakos, Brett and Company Ltd.,
New # 142, Velachery Road,
Guindy, Chennai - 600 042. ... 1st respondent in both WPs
2.The Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories, Division 4, Chennai - 600 006. ... 2nd respondent in
W.P.No.17710/2004
3.The Commissioner of Labour, DMS Compound, Chennai - 600 006. ...2nd respondent in16368/2006

Held,
The learned counsel for the first respondent has brought to my notice, the judgment of theKerala High Court reported in 1999 LLR 1156 [Binani Zinc Employees Union, Binanipuram P.O by
the Vice President and another v. The Labour Commissioner, Trivandrum and others] to fortify his contention that under Section 135-B(4) of the Act, it is not mandatory that all establishments will have to grant paid holiday to the employees on the date of poll.

I have perused the said judgement and the said judgement is distinguishable on facts in view of the fair submission made by the learned counsel for the first respondent that the first respondent
establishment is not covered under Section 135-B(4) of the Act. It was a case, wherein, the employer sought exemption under Section 135-B(4) of the Act. On facts and further taking into account,
Section 135-B of the Act, the Kerala High Court found that the employer is covered under Section135-B(4) of the Act.

Furthermore, basing on the aforesaid Circulars of the Election Commission dated 06.04.1999and 07.04.2004, the Commissioner of Labour, issued letters dated 26.04.2004 and 10.04.2006,directing the establishments in Tamil nadu to comply with the mandate imposed under Section135-B of the Act read with the Circulars of the Election Commission of India to declare holiday with wages on the poll day. In spite of the same, the first respondent has chosen not to follow the circulars as well as the mandatory provisions of the statute.
23. For all the aforesaid reasons, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to succeed.

Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed. The first respondent is directed to pay wages to all the workmen of the establishment, who abstained from work by not accepting to work in the re-arranged shift during the poll day. The wages shall be paid within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
To
1.The Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories, Division 4, Chennai - 600 006.
2.The Commissioner of Labour, DMS Compound, Chennai - 600 006.

Shared by - Siju Jose T, +Siju Jose Senior Manager - HRD, Oil Palm India Limited