Labour ResearchJuly-August 2017

VOL:14 NO.4 BANGALORE JULY- AUGUST 2017

UNION IS STRENGTH

Editorial

PAIN OF A SECULAR INDIAne of the most painful situation the country had faced during the period ofindependence was the partition of India on religious basis. Our freedom

fighters were under bonafide impression that with the partition, the country willbe religiously tolerant and peace will prevail across.

Our constitution provides for a socialistic, secular, democratic republic based onthe principle of justice, liberty, equality and fraternity. Whereas the principlesof co-existence as envisaged in the constitution between people of differentreligions proved to be a distant dream, as people continued to fight in the nameof religion. It looks like that other than taking oath in the name of constitutionour political leaders have scant respect for our constitution. Though they preachsecularism they forget their responsibility to the society.

When our constitution embodies the principle of religious tolerance, right tofreedom of speech and expression, not to be at the cost of others, the politiciansand religious leaders are duty bound to protect these rights, irrespective ofreligion or region under the principles of co-existence.

The recent incidences of violence across the country especially in the state ofWest Bengal in the name of religion had sent shock waves across the country. Itis very unfortunate that various religious groups are trying to foment troubleacross in the state. Deliberate spread of incendiary fake news through socialmedia with intention of causing communal hatred is the root cause of the troublethe state. Before the state government could prevent any mishap war of tweetshad already spread, thereby shattering the uneasy calm in the society. With thegrowth of technology any happenings anywhere in the world gets flashed in theform of news and roumers, as wild fire without knowing its consequence.

The state of West Bengal had the record of very poor communal riots afterpartition of the country expect in the year 1964. Even the 1984 anti sikh riotor communal riot after demolition of Babri Masjid in the year 1992-93 whenother parts of the country was burning, communal harmony was prevailing in thestate. Even the illegal immigration from Bangladesh did not spoil the communalharmony in the state, that is only being utilized by the politicians for theirpolitical ends. The state had even given asylum to the Bangladesh writer, TasleemaNasreen, for whose blood the fanatics across the border was trying.

O

TO SEEK A FAVOUR IS TO BARTER AWAY ONE'S FREEDOM

2 Labour Research ,July-August 2017

Those politicians who are trying to exploit thesituation should understand that taking care ofthe security of the citizens and maintainingtranquility in the society should be their primeconcern or else they are unworthy to take up thegreat responsibility bestowed upon them by thepeople of the country.

A more worried Amaritya Sen, the Nobel laureateexpressed his unhappiness and anxiety over theissue in West Bengal. He was not willing to endorsethe cries of helplessness. ‘Being helpless is anexcuse. If we are failing to achieve something itis because we are not trying. It is not becausewe cannot try’ he said.

‘Bengal had rich legacy of Hindu- Muslim staying

together and for a long time this co-existencewas possible without any communalism andsuddenly this return. In this context whysuddenly problems are erupting needs to beunderstood. We have to take measures to getrid of these things’ he said. In this context healso reminded the Bengal riot during partition.According to him there is a need to find outwhat extent the political misdeeds wereresponsible for communal flare up.

Mere playing politics of blaming each other willnot solve the problem. People need to be educatedabout the consequences of indulging in forwardingmessages, that may spoil the peace and religioustranquility in the society.

ny “Jayanti” or anniversary iscelebrated to remember the

historical background andimportance of that particular day. Inpresent scenario it is internationallyacknowledged that a “working day”for working class is for eight hoursin a day. Virtually there is story behind this which ismore important. It is result of great sacrifice andbloodshed against the old system of work for higherperiod beyond eight hours in a day. The agitation andrevolt started from foreign countries in the beginningof eighteenth century to limit the working hours toeight hours in a day for working class.

In between the year 1820 to 1840 various industrialstrikes were done by the working class to reduce thelimit of working hours. In the year. 1827 the “masons”resorted to strike from their work and demanded forten hours working. This agitation slowly spread overin America. In 1837 even Government employeesdemanded to reduce the working hours in the offices,and accordingly the working hours for Governmentemployees was fixed for ten hours. Following the trendthe working class in Australia Carve out a Slogan that“eight hours of working, eight hours recreation andeight hours for rest” are the human need.

Again in 1884 in America the agitation started foreight hours working. On 7th October 1884 in Fifth

MAZDOOR DIWAS (1st MAY 0R MAY DAY)

Congress of American Federation ofLabour, a resolution was passed for eighthours working w.e.f. 1st of May, 1886legally. Again the same resolution wasrepeated in American Federation ofLabour in 1885 Session and large scalepreparation was started to get it resolved

in Chicago Conference. To press the demandeffectively a striving Committee (Sangharsh Samiti)was formed.

In order to implement the resolution a processionwas organized on a Sunday just falling before 1st ofMay 1886 in which nearly twenty five thousandworkers participated. In continuation of thatagitation the workers left the work on 1st of May1886 to press their demand and came on the road.Nearly eighty thousand workers reached on “Lakefront” in a procession and were converted into ameeting. Despite such huge gathering the meetingwas held peacefully and without any bloodshed.

During the above agitation great confusion startedamongst the supporters of capitalism, that “loss ofone is the basis of gain to others.” This confusioncreated the resentment and anger amongst thecapitalists. May 2 was Sunday a holiday, but on 3rdMay, the strike and agitation was flared with gunfire resulting the death of six workers and injury toseveral other workers in the procession. On 4th May

Labour Issues

A

NEVER BEND BEFORE THE INSOLENT MIGHT

Labour Research,July-August 2017 4

Article

1886 a meeting of workers was held to condemn thefiring and atrocities on workers demanding eighthours working. At that time Trade Union activist andleader Mr. Albert Parson alongwith his family (his wifeand two children) reached at the meeting place,attended the meeting and addressed the workers.After addressing the meeting Mr. Parson went in anearly hotel alongwith his family where the speechwas being heard. Suddenly at about 10 p.m. in thenight the police encircled the meeting place alongwithhotel and started firing on the mob creating policeviolence. Several innocent workers were arrested andfaced the trial of the Court cases. On 1st of Octobermost of them were penalized with death sentenceincluding Mr. Parson. The date for execution of deathsentence was fixed for 11th November 1886.

In 1891 an International Conference was held againin Brussels in which the object and importance of“May Day” was again discussed. After above repeatedoccurrences regarding “May Day” celebration, itbecame a convention to celebrate May Day all overthe worked to create a consciousness regarding eighthours working in a day and to implement it honestly.

In India this celebration started from Madras in 1923in the leadership of M.S. Chetiar. In 1926 thiscelebration started through gate meetings,processions and demonstration. In 1927 the area ofeight hours working was extended in Municipal Board,Post and Telegraph Department, Textile industry andDock workers also. A general strike was resorted inKanpur on 1st of May 1953.

With above awareness and awakening almost eighthours working is included in all labour laws, but itrequires strict implementation by all concerned. Now“May Day” is being celebrated as internationalsolidarity day. In nut-shell the sacrifice and solidarityof working class in Chicago has become an inspirationagainst exploitation of working class all over the worldand being celebrated as Mazdoor Diwas. In presentscenario the relevancy and importance of “May Day”requires that the trade unions must adopt a changein their work culture and their thinking.

By..........M.P. SrivastavAsstt. Labour Commissioner (Retd.)

Source: FLR 2017 (153)

ection 4 of the Payment ofGratuity Act, 1972 provides

that gratuity shall be payable toan employee on the terminationof his employment after he hasrendered continuous service fornot less than five years;

(a) on his superannuation, or

(b) on his retirement or resignation or

(c) or his death or disablement due to accidentor disease:

Provided that the completion of continuous serviceof five years shall not be necessary where thetermination of employment of any employee is dueto death or disablement.

In the case of Mettur Beardsell Ltd. (representedby its Personnel Manager), Madras v. Regional

240 DAYS WORKING IS SIGNIFICANT IN LABOUR LAWSIn fifth year it means complete five years for entitlement to gratuity

Labour Commissioner (CentralAuthority under the Payment ofGratuity Act, 1972), Madras, theMadras High Court has held that anemployee rendering continuous servicefor a period of 240 days in a year, i.e. thefifth year, will be deemed to havecontinued in service for one year as

stipulated by section 2-A of the Act. The Madras HighCourt has distinguished the earlier ruling of theAndhra Pradesh High Court wherein it was held thatan employee who has worked for 4 years and 11months and 10 days having not completed 5 yearsof service will not be entitled to gratuity.

In addition to above, the legal position is furtherbuttressed by latest ruling of Kerala High Court inSreeja v. Regional Joint Labour Commissioner,wherein it has been held that sub-section (2) ofsection 2-A of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972specifically deems continuous service within any

S

DEFEND THE ECONOMIC SOVEREIGNTY OF THE COUNTRY

4 Labour Research,July-August-2017

period of one year, not coming within the meaningof clause (1), to be continuous service, if in thepreceding period of 12 calendar months, theworkman has worked for 240 days. It has also beenheld that by a deeming provision, the Act providesfor the service in any 12 months of a five year periodto be treated as continuous service, if the employeehas more than 240 days of services.

In the absence of any other judgment of the SupremeCourt the judgments of the Madras and Kerala HighCourt would be laying down good law. NoControlling or Appellate Authority, anywhere inIndia, would dare to bye-pass or overlook thejudgments of the Madras and Kerala High Court.The contention that the judgments of the Madras andKerala High Court should be restricted in the Stateof Tamil Nadu and State of Kerala only, would notbe sustainable even in other states. Hence thesejudgments are being universally followed.

Be it also clarified that under labour jurisprudence,the 240 days working by an employee has attainedsignificance since section 2-B of the IndustrialDisputes Act, 1947 defining ‘continuous service ‘ alsoclarifies that a workman who works for 240 dayswill be deemed as if he has completed 5 years ofservice. In this context, reference is made to thejudgment of Supreme Court in Surendra KumarVerma v. Central Govt. Industrial Tribunalwherein it has been held by three Judge Bench that

the Industrial Disputes Act amended by Act 36 of1964 w.e.f. 15.12.1964 stating “Act 36 of 1964 hasdrastically changed the position, section 2(eee) havebeen repealed and section 25-B(2) now begins withthe clause “Where a workman is not in continuousservice........for a period of one year”. These changesbrought about by Act 36 of 1964 appear to be clearlydesigned to provide that a workman who has actuallyworked under the employer for not less than 240days during a period of twelve months shall bedeemed to have been in continuous service for aperiod of one year whether or not he has in factbeen in such continuous service for a period of oneyear. It is enough that he has worked for 240 days ina period of 12 months; it is not necessary that heshould have been in the service of the employer forone whole year.” Also under Factories Act providingthat a worker will become entitled to earned leaveonly when he has worked for one year. Thus byapplying the principles of interpretation of statutespertaining to industrial jurisprudence, 240 daysworking by an employee will be treated as one yearservice.

In view of the above, it has become a generalpractice to pay gratuity to an employee who has workfor 4 years and 240 days.

ByH.L.Kumar Advocate

Source: FLR 2017 (153)

MATERNITY BENEFIT (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2017-CLARIFICATION

ovt, of India Ministry of Labour& Employment Shram Shakti

Bhawan. Rafi Marg, New Delhi —April 12, 2017

The Labour Department, All States/Union Territories

Sub.: The Maternity Benefit(Amendment) Act, 2017 Reg.

Sir/Madam,

In line with recommendations of the

44th, 45th and 46th Session of IndianLabour Conference (ILC) and demandsfrom various quarters, the Governmenthas recently enacted the Maternity Benefit(Amendment) Act, 2017. Through thisAmendment Act, following provisions havebeen added to the Maternity Benefit Act,1961:—

Increase in the maternity leave fromexisting 12 to 26 weeks for working womenwith less than two surviving children.

Provisions for work from home for

G

SUCCESS COMES TO THOSE WHO DARE AND ACT

Labour Research,July-August -2017 6

nursing mothers.

Mandatory provisions for establishmentshaving fifty or more employees to have the facilityof creche.

Extension of twelve weeks of maternitybenefit to the ‘commissioning mother’ and the‘adopting mother ‘ from the date the child ishanded over.

Provisions of the Amendment Act have come intoforce w.e.f. 1st April, 2017, except those relatingto creche facility [Section 4(1)] which would comeinto force from 1.7.2017.

2. After the enactment of the said Act, the Ministryhas been receiving numerous queries relating therevised provisions of the Act. The Ministry hasexamined such Queries in consultation with ChiefLabour Commissioner (Central) and the same areclarified as below:—

Sl. QUERY CLARIFICATIONNO.

1 Applicability of the Act to contractual Since there is no amendment in section 2 of the Act,or consultant women employees. hence the original provision will prevail. The Act is

applicable to all women who are employed in anycapacity directly or through any agency i.e.,either oncontractual or as consultant.

2 Whether enhanced maternity benefit,as modified by the Maternity Benefit(Amendment) Bill 2016 can be extendedto women who are already undermaternity leave at the time ofenforcement of this Amendment Act? Yes

3 Whether enhanced maternity benefit can Those women employees who had already availedbe extended to those women who have 12 weeks of maternity leave before enforcementjoined after availing 12 weeks of the of the Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act, 2017 i.e.,maternity leave? 1st April, 2017, shall not be entitled to avail the

extended benefit of the 26 weeks leave.

4 Protection of women in case she is fired Under section 12 of the M B. Act, 1961 it isby the employer after learning her emphasized that any dismissal or discharge of apregnancy? woman during the pregnancy is unlawful and such

employer can be punished under section21 of the Act

5 Whether benefits of this Act can The Maternity Benefit Act is applicable to all mines,be extended to the employed plantations, shops and establishments and factories.women in the unorganized Sector? Mines, plantations, shop and establishments could be

either in organized sector or unorganized sector. Also,clarification at SI No.1 may be seen.

3. It is requested that these clarifications may be noted for compliance and also circulated widely so as tomake the pregnant working women aware of their rights.

Source: FLR 2017(153)

WORK IS WORSHIP, DO YOUR DUTY

6 Labour Research, July-August-2017

ndia is one of the mostunequal countries in the

world. In terms of Ginicoefficient, i.e. measure ofincome inequity, India ranks adismal 135 out of 187 countries.This means that most of theprosperity that an increasinglyeconomically liberalized Indiais seeing, belongs primarily to the top-incomepercentiles. One in every five Indians lives on lessthan $2 a day. When India grows by 7%, one slice ofthe population sees double digit growth, while a bigchunk of the populace may be facing negative growthin their income. A basic level of income for everyoneseems like common sense in concept.

Economic Survey makes a spirited pitch for auniversal basic income. It argues that India spendsroughly 5% of its GDP every year on centrallysponsored schemes –some of which are operatingpretty much on default, and some dating back to pre-independence (evidently the ‘Livestock Health andDisease Control’ schemes is four years shy ofcompleting a century!). Incidentally, 5% of GDP isgreater than our overall fiscal deficit of 3.2%, andalmost three times of what the government spendson infrastructure related expenditure. Also, thepoorest of districts are also the ones that suffer frommaximum misallocations of funds.

Having a universal basic income means that everycitizen, rich or poor, gets a handout from thegovernment –without having to prove that one isadequately poor. Maybe the mind boggling numberof farmer suicides in the country could be reduced ifthe government could be in a position to guaranteebasic sustenance for the families.

However, this is not the first time India has playedwith the idea of providing something close to anuniversal social security net. The Mahatma GandhiNational Rural Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) that offersa minimum wage and employment; is now around

ten-years old. The optics ofmass rural employment hasensured that despite all itseconomic misgivings, thescheme has now survived threegovernments. Every Budgetsuccessive finance ministersmake it a point to givethemselves a pat on the back

for increasing MGNREGA allocations.

Theoretically, the plan was a stroke of genius. On theone hand, it was to tackle the problem of a burgeoningyoung unskilled population seeking jobs. On theother, labourers were to work on building agriculturalinfrastructure. This way, the programme were to attackthree of India’s most vexing deficits in one fell swoop-the jobs deficit, the social security deficit, and theinfrastructure deficit.

However, even the greatest advocates of MGNREGAwill probably agree that it has been a mixed success.For a programme being run across the length andbreadth of India; there are myriad stories ofmiddlemen siphoning funds; of ponds being dugmindlessly on hill tops; of fabrication of accounts; anduntimely payments.

But even then most people argue that this was at leasta conscious effort by the governments to transfermoney from its coffers to the grass roots. Even if apart of it is being siphoned off by middlemen and localpower brokers- it still remains a fiscal stimulus. It isquite literally the Keynesian style of governmentintervention –asking people to dig up holes and fillthem up in an effort to keep the economy growing.

In many ways, it chimes closely with the concept ofUBI. There is a transfer of money from the governmentto citizens, without guarantee of any significantincrease in productivity.

There is a valid question as to how UBI could affectthe broader economy; and probably glancing at the

GOING THE MGNREGA WAY

I

FORTUNE FAVOURS THE BRAVE

Labour Research,July-August-2017 8

experience of MGNREGA could provide someindication. One, there is likely to be an increase inconsumption. Which per-se isn’t really a bad thing-except that Indian consumption generally remainsrobust even when there is a fall in investment andbroader economy slows down?

Unraveling the GDP figures of the last few yearsreveals a doggedly strong consumption growth thatis hauling up the 7% statistic; even while investmentsare sinking and manufacturing is coughing. Thecombination of increased consumption andaggregates demand without development of adequatecapital assets is recipe for inflationary pressures inIndia.

MGNREGA wages are also linked to consumptionprices- they get revised in tandem with consumerprice inflation. It is welcome from the perspective ofthe recipients because it insures them from havingtheir income eaten up by increase in inflation. Butthere is a concern that this might in turn affect inflation.A RBI study on food inflation opines otherwise.Anecdotal evidence suggests that land owners andfarmers complain of having to face increasing wage

costs and shortage of labor. Rural wages has over thepast few years accelerated over urban wages,coinciding with the introduction of MGNREGA.Either ways, like MGNREGA, it is very likely that UBIwill also be revised annually with the run –rate ofinflation. And there is no guarantee that this wouldn’tdistort labour markets and lead to inflationarypressures. Basic jobs will cost more, because the poorwill pit their salary offers against the minimum amountthat is being guaranteed by the government. And thisshock will eventually percolate to the rest of the jobbands.

If there is one irrefutable ultimate political economylesson from MGNREGA, it is that once introduced,there will be no going back. Politics around such ascheme would make it a persistent feature on fiscalbalance sheets regardless of whether the economicsof it add up.

As celebrated economist Milton Freidman once said,“Nothing so permanent as temporary governmentprogramme!”

Source: Financial Express-date-20.3.17

s inequality for allbecomes the new global

norm, right to decent work willsoon disappear. Not only wagesare eroding but a very largenumber of workers are maderedundant in every country.Those who are unemployed arealso unlikely to find any newjobs soon. Consequently,insecurity has become the orderof the day. Little wonder the International LabourOrganisation (ILO) –which was established in 1919immediately after the destructive First World War- isfacing an existential dilemma about its raison d’êtrefor protecting labour rights and employment. Becauseof the dominant neoliberal economic policies andglobalization, the global labour watchdog seems

somewhat hollowed out.

Yet, it sprang to life duringthe 106th session ofInternational LabourCongress last week whenone of its major membersratified two fundamentalconventions for eliminatingchild labour. That memberhas allowed worst forms of

child labour to persist from time immemorial. Forcenturies, if had perpetuated a caste system thatrelegated the Dalits to child /forced/ bond labour.

Therefore, when India ratified two ILO conventions–the Minimum Age convention, 1973 (No.138) andthe Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999

INDIA RATIFYING ILO CONVENTIONS ON CHILD LABOUR A GOOD STEP

A

8 Labour Research,July-August-2017

STRONG REASONS MAKE STRONG ACTIONS

(No.138) and the Worst Forms of Child LabourConvention, 1999 (No.182) –on 13 June, there wasa small celebration. The First convention mandatesmember countries of the ILO to fix the minimumage for admission to employment or work within itsterritory. It requires India to ensure that no one underthe fixed age is admitted for work in any occupationexcept in cases of light work and artisticperformance.

And the second convention, i.e. No.182 will requireIndia to prohibit the worst forms of child labour.New Delhi is mandated to take immediate andeffective measures to secure the prohibition andelimination of the worst forms of child labour on awar footing. The worst forms of child labour includeslavery, debt bondage, serfdom, forced compulsorylabour, including requirement of children for use inarmed conflicts, procuring or offering children forillicit activities as well as hazardous activities andso on.

India has taken a “historic step” by ratifying the twoconventions, said Guy Ryder, ILO directory general.“From today, as a result of what we are about to do,Convention 182 on the worst forms of child labourwill cover more than 99 percent of the world’schildren, all the Coverage of the Convention 138 onminimum age in employment will leap fromapproximately 60 percent in the world to almost 80percent,” he claimed. Clearly the two estimatesprovided by the ILO chief suggest staggeringproblem of child labour in India.

Small wonder India is the 170th country for ratifyingthe minimum age convention and 181st nation forcommitting to eliminate the worst forms of childlabour. Before ratifying the conventions, thegovernment amended the child labour law last year.The new law allows a child to be employed or helphis family or family owned enterprises after schoolhours and during holidays. It set 14 years as thegeneral minimum age for employment and raisedto 18 years the legal age at which people couldengage in hazardous work. It also cut down thenumber of jobs that 15-18 year olds are banned from

doing. In effect, the new law paves the way forchildren to be employed in family owned industrieslike diamond cutting, scavenging, brick kilns,slaughterhouses, or as domestic help.

The biggest problem remains lack of adequateinformation and monitoring mechanisms for tacklingchild domestic labour in India. In the so –calledinformal sector where millions of children areemployed in big cities and even in smaller cities, it isgoing to be a herculean task for implementation. Theeconomics of monitoring and implementation of lawsconcerning child labour according to a former ILOeconomist, who asked not to be identified, is “ acostly and a burdensome process,” Unless there is asocial movement to eliminate / eradicate child labour,it is going to be a difficult task to live up to the twoconventions, he has argued.

Further, the government has to provide budgetaryfunds for investing in primary and secondaryeducation and other amenities to dissuade childrenbeing pushed into labour. Simultaneously, it mustaddress the problem of youth unemployment so toensure that children who are drawn into educationhave a chance of getting better jobs after their studies.Sadly, “under the new Child Labour Act, some formsof child labour may become invisible and the mostvulnerable and marginalized children may end upwith irregular school attendance, lower levels oflearning and could be forced to drop out of school,”says Euphrates Gobina Unicef’s chief of education inIndia, according to a BBC news report of 27th July2016.

Further, India’s millions of child labourers –who are“routinely found to be working under huge socio-economic compulsions from their poverty drivenpopulation”- face enormous difficulties and continueto be denied normal childhood, according to AmodKanth, general secretary of Praya, a non –profitorganization working for the rights of marginalizedchildren, women and young people. “There appearsto be a systemic shift in the process of defining achild, compromising the safety net of 18 years, asprovided under various laws and policies,” he has

Labour Research,July-August-2017 10MAN IS THE ARCHITECT OF HIS OWN FUTURE

autilya also popularlyknown a Chanakya one of the

greatest management expert,economist, administrator andstrategist India has ever seen livedduring 4th century B.C. He wasthe guardian and teacher of kingChandra Gupta Mourya and wasresponsible for his coronation.Kautilya was also the Prime Minister of ChandraGupta Mourya kingdom and was responsible for allhis success. Through the strategy and acumen ofkautilya, Chandra Gupta Mourya could expand hiskingdom up to Afghanistan in west and parts ofcentral Asia. He had also captured Magadha afterdefeating Nandas dynasty.

India saw a renaissance during the period of ChandraGupta Mourya in the field of arts, culture andliterature. Chandra Gupta Mourya was thecontemporary of Alexander the Great, king ofGreece, who tried to invade India by defeating Porusthe king of Punjab. The invasion was howeverprevented by Chandra Gupta Mourya. Magastheneswas the Greek ambassador to the court of ChandraGupta Mourya, as a representative of Seleucus theking of Greece.

Kautilya was educated at Taksha Shila now knownas Taxila a university of ancient India. The Universitywas in existence for more than 2700 years back, with

students studied from various parts ofthe world. It was in the rank of IIT andMIT with studies in different field, suchas Vedas, Philosophy, Ayurveda,Agriculture, Surgery, Politics, Archery,Warfare, Astronomy, Commerce, Music,Dance etc. Apart from Kautilya manyrenowned scholars have educated at theuniversity as his contemporary such as

Panini the great exponent of Grammer in Sanskrit,Vishnu Sharma author of political science who wrotethe book titled “Pancha Tantra” meaning fivetechniques, Charaka the famous Ayurvdic Physician,Javak the Physician, who was an expert in pulsereading, Panchakarma, neuro and surgery.

Chankya is the author of famous book titled“Arthasastra”. It is an Indian treatise on state craft,economics and military strategy, written in 150chapter consists of 15 volumes. The book also dealswith management, civil administration, such as howa state aught to be ruled and administered by a kingand his administrators with Indian and globalpolitical theory. It also contains very detailed andsystematic prescriptions of solutions to variousproblems that are associated with monarchial formof governance. The book is a masterly creation basedon intensive research in depth and originality, withan absorbing detailed interpretive exposition of thesubjects.

argued in an article India’s child labor laws areviolating child rights in The Sunday Guardianon 18th June.

Notwithstanding these problems that continue topersist even after the new child law, ratifying thetwo ILO conventions for eradicating child labour is agood step. Even though the ILO convention lack anyintrusive – teeth like the World Trade Organisationrules, they still carry some weight in naming and

shaming a country if it fails to implement them. Everyfour years, every ILO member who has ratifiedConventions 138 and 182 will face internationalscrutiny. Therefore, even if India’s ratification of thetwo ILO fundamental conventions may amount topublic relations gimmick for some internationallabour analysts, it is an important step for subjectingone’s performance on vital issues concerning childlabour to global commitments.

SOURCE –MINT- DATE-21.6.17

KAUTILYA AND ARTHASASTRA

"Once you start aworking on something,don't be afraid offailure and don'tabandon it. People whowork sincerely are thehappiest." - Chanakya

K

10 Labour Research,July-August-2017

WORKERS OF INDIA, UNITE

[2017 (152) FLR 1010]

(MADRAS HIGH COURT)

A. SELVAM and P. KALAIYARASAN, JJ.

W.A. No. 2302 of 2013 and M.P. No. 1 of 2013

August 1, 2016

Between

MANAGING DIRECTOR, TAMIL NADU STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION

and

E. MAARI and another

Dismissal—From service—Respondent workman driver was dismissed from service—He was found to

have committed the offence mentioned in charge—Industrial dispute dismissed by the Labour Court—

However, Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and set aside the dismissal order and directed to

reinstate him—Single Judge has rightly held that the management has not at all established the al-

leged fact the due to negligence of workman, the accident has happened—No error found with—

Appeal is dismissed. [Para 14]

JUDGMENT

A. SELVAM, J.—This Writ Appeal has beendirected against the order dated 24.6.2013,passed in W.P. No. 502 of 2007, by the learnedSingle Judge of this court. The first respondentherein, during the relevant period, has servedas a driver of the appellant and he caused anaccident on 8.3.1999, which resulted in death ofthree persons and consequently, a domesticenquiry has been conducted, wherein, it is foundthat the first respondent has committed theoffence mentioned in the charge and ultimately,

he has been dismissed from service. The dismissalorder has been challenged in I.D.No.375 of 2001,on the file of the second respondent herein.

2. The second respondent, after considering the rivalevidence available on record, has dismissed I.D. No.375 of 2001. The order passed by the secondrespondent has been challenged in W.P. No. 502 of2007, on the file of this Court.

3. The learned Single Judge of this Court, afterhearing arguments of both sides and. after analysingthe available records, has allowed W.P.No.502 of

According to Kautilya the power of knowledge isthe power of the counsel, the power of the treasuryand the army is the power of might and power ofthe valour is the power of energy.

Several administrative suggestions prescribed bythe author are still relevant and practical in modern

administrative world. As per report Pt. JawaharlalNehru, the first Prime Minister of India was an ardentfollower of Kautilya, his administrative principles andstrategies.

Though we are the followers of Kautilya’s legacy weare yet to adopt his strategy comprehensively.

Judicial Verdict

Labour Research,July-August-2017 12

A GOOD MAN DOES NOT ARGUE, HE WHO ARGUES IS NOT A GOOD MAN

2007 and thereby set aside the dismissal orderand ultimately directed the appellant/Management to re-instate the first respondent/writ petitioner, by way of passing the impugnedorder and the same is being challenged in thepresent writ appeal.

4. The learned Counsel appearing for theappellant/Management has contended to theeffect that after accident, the concerned MotorVehicle Inspector has inspected the bus whichinvolved in the accident and he has given hisreport, wherein it is stated that the accident hasnot happened due to mechanical defect.

5. The main defence put forth on the side of theappellant/Management is that only due to rashand negligent driving of the first respondent/workman, the entire accident has happened andthe Labour Court, after considering the availableevidence on record, has rightly upheld thedismissal order passed by the Management, butthe learned Single Judge, without properlyappreciating the available evidence, haserroneously set aside the dismissal order andtherefore, the order passed by the learned SingleJudge, is liable to be set aside.

6. The learned Counsel appearing for the firstrespondent/workman has contended that in theinstant case, on the side of the Managementsufficient evidence has not been forthcoming forthe purpose of showing that the accident hashappened only due to rash and negligent drivingof the first respondent/ workman and even theManagement has suppressed certain materialdocuments and the learned Single Judge, afterconsidering the vital infirmities found on the sideof the Management, has rightly set aside thedismissal order and therefore, the order passedby the learned Single Judge, in W.P. No. 502 of2007, is not liable to be set aside

7. It is an admitted fact that an accident hashappened on 8.3.1999 and due to accident, threepersons have passed away and consequently, adomestic enquiry has been conducted against thefirst respondent/workman, wherein he has beenfound guilty of charges framed against him cardthereafter, he has been dismissed from service. Thedismissal order has been challenged in I.D.No.375of 2001, on the file of the second respondent herein.

8. The second respondent, after considering therival evidence available on record, has upheld thedismissal order passed by the Management. Theorder passed by the first respondent has beenchallenged in W.P.No.502 of 2007.

9. The learned Single Judge has given a specificfinding to the effect that there is no sufficientevidence for the purpose of proving that the entireaccident has happened only due to rash andnegligent driving of the first respondent/workmanand ultimately set aside the dismissal order.

10. On the basis of rival submissions made oneither side, the Court has to look into as to whetherthe appellant/Management has clinchinglyestablished that the entire accident has happenedonly due to rash and negligent driving of the firstrespondent/workman.

11. It is an admitted fact that on the side of theManagement, one of the drivers has been examinedas M.W.3 and his specific evidence is that on theprevious day he found some parts of the bus indisorder condition and the same has been writtenin a log- sheet. Further he deposed in his evidenceto the effect that he personally reported the sameto the concerned officer.

12. Even though, M.W.3 has given such kind ofevidence, for the purpose of disproving the evidencegiven by him, the Management has not filed any

LABOUR RESEARCHTo: OFFICERS'CAUSE DOMESTIC ENQUIRY LABOUR RESEARCH

Rates of Subscription Rates of Subscription Rates of SubscriptionANNUAL : ` 40/- ANNUAL : ` 40/- ANNUAL : ` 30/-

Drafts should be drawn in favour of

AND MAILED TO

THE GENERAL SECRETARY

ALL INDIA STATE BANK OFFICERS' FEDERATIONSTATE BANK BUILDINGS,

ST.MARK'S ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001: 080-22270619: FAX : 22214959/22214956,

E-mail: aisbofbangalore@gmail.comWeb: http://www.aisbof.org

EDITED and Published by Sri. Y. Sudarshan on behalf of AISBOF, at SBI Buildings,St.Mark's Road, Bangalore - 560 001, Printed at L.V. Graphics, Bangalore- 560 021 23321456

JULY-AUGUST LABOUR RESEARCH

IF UNDELIVERED PLEASE RETURN TO:ALL INDIA STATE BANK OFFICERS' FEDERATION

SBI BUILDINGS, ST.MARK'S ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001

12 Labour Research, July-August -2017

Subscribe To

relevant log-sheet. Considering the fact that M.W.3has given categorical evidence to the effect thatthere is some mechanical defect in the bus, whichcaused the accident, the entire burden lies uponthe Management to prove that at the time ofaccident there is no mechanical defect.

13. It is true that after accident, the concernedMotor Vehicle Inspector has inspected the buswhich caused the accident and he is of the opinionthat the accident has not happened only due tomechanical defect. Simply on the basis of reportof Motor Vehicles Inspector and also on the basisof some flimsy evidence available on the side ofthe Management, the second respondent hasupheld the dismissal order. But, as pointed outearlier, the Management has wantonly suppressedthe material document which has been spoken byM.W.3. Since the Management has suppressed thematerial document which has been spoken byM.W.3, this Court is of the considered view that

the Management has not at all established thealleged fact that the entire accident has happenedonly due to rash and negligent driving of the firstrespondent/workman.

14. The learned Single Judge, after consideringthe vital infirmities found on the side of theappellant/Management, has rightly given a findingto the effect that the Management has not at allestablished the alleged fact that due to negligenceof the workman, such accident has happened. Inview of the discussion made earlier, this Court hasnot found any force in the contention put forth onthe side of the appellant and altogether, the presentwrit appeal deserves to be dismissed.

In fine, this Writ Appeal is dismissed. The orderpassed by the learned Single Judge, in W.P.No.502of 2007, is confirmed. No cost. Connectedmiscellaneous petition is dismissed.

Appeal Dismissed.