{"id":255228,"date":"1971-12-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1971-12-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971"},"modified":"2015-01-30T20:39:34","modified_gmt":"2015-01-30T15:09:34","slug":"jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971","title":{"rendered":"Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1972 AIR 605, 1972 SCR (2) 920<\/div>\n
Author: K K Mathew<\/div>\n
Bench: Mathew, Kuttyil Kurien<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nJAYDIP INDUSTRIES, THANA\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE WORKMEN\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT16\/12\/1971\n\nBENCH:\nMATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN\nBENCH:\nMATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN\nVAIDYIALINGAM, C.A.\n\nCITATION:\n 1972 AIR  605\t\t  1972 SCR  (2) 920\n 1972 SCC  (3) 302\n CITATOR INFO :\n R\t    1974 SC 526\t (14)\n\n\nACT:\nIndustrial  Tribunal-Jurisdiction  to fix minimum  wages  at\nrates higher than those fixed by government during  pendency\nof  industrial\tdispute-Minimum\t Wages Act<\/a>  1948  S.  3(2A)<\/a>.\nIndustrial dispute-Minimum wages, what is.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nDuring\tthe  pendency of an industrial dispute\tbetween\t the\nappellant and its workmen, arising out of the demand of\t the\nworkmen for higher scales of pay, the appropriate government\nfixed  under section 3<\/a> of the Minimum Wages Act,  1948,\t the\nminimum\t rates\tof  wages  for\tthe  employees\temployed  in\nscheduled  employments including the  appellant's  industry.\nThe tribunal found that the appellant concern was not finan-\ncially\tstable.\t It fixed the minimum wages at rates  higher\nthan  the  rate fixed by the government.  In its  award\t the\ntribunal referred to the minimum rates of wages fixed in the\nseveral\t awards\t passed\t by it from 1962  onwards  and\talso\nconsidered  the\t rist in the cost of living.  It  also\ttook\ninto  account  the  consumer price index for  the  month  of\nDecember, 1966, and that for the month of January, 1967, for\ncoming\tto  the\t conclusion that  rates\t higher\t than  those\nspecified in the notification published by government should\nbe  fixed  as minimum wages.  On the questions\twhether\t the\ntribunal was right in fixing wages at rates higher than\t the\nrates  fixed  by the government under s. 3<\/a> of  the  Act\t and\nwhether what was fixed by the tribunal were minimum wages,\nHELD : (i) Sub-section (2A) of section 3<\/a> makes it clear that\neven  after  the fixation of minimum rates of wages  by\t the\nappropriate government under s. 3<\/a> of the Act, it is open  to\nan  Industrial Tribunal adjudicating an\t industrial  dispute\nrelating  to wages payable to the employees in\ta  scheduled\nemployment to fix minimum wages at higher or lower rates, if\nthe  dispute was pending at the time of fixation of  minimum\nages under s.  3<\/a>. [924 G]\n(ii ) Minimum wages can provide not only for the  sustenance\nof life, but also for the preservation of the efficiency  of\nthe  worker.  The rates of wages fixed by the tribunal\twere\nneither fair wages nor wages bordering on fair wages.\tThey\nwere minimum wages as explained by this Court.\tAs such\t the\ncapacity  of  the  industry  to\t pay  was  not\ta   relevant\nconsideration. [925 F]\nU.  Unichovi v. State of Kerala. [1962] 1 S.C.R. at p.\t957,\napplied.\nThe tribunal was not wrong in taking into account the rates\nof minimum wages fixed in the several awards for the workmen\nemployed  in  the city of Bombay as affording  criteria\t for\nfixing minimum rates of wages with suitable modification for\nthe workmen employed under the appellant. [926 E]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 912 of 1967.\n<\/p>\n
921<\/span><\/p>\n
Appeal\tby Special Leave from the Award dated March 3,\t1967
\nof the Industrial Tribunal, Maharashtra, Bombay in Reference
\n(IT) No. 1 of 1968.\n<\/p>\n
I. N. Shroff for the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nMathew,\t J. This appeal Mathew, j. This appeal,\t by  special
\nleave,\tis from an award passed by the Industrial  Tribunal,
\nMaharashtra, Bombay, on March 3, 1967.
\nThe  Government of Maharashtra referred to the\tTribunal  on
\nDecember 31, 1965, under section 10(1)<\/a> (d) of the industrial
\nDisputes  Act<\/a>,\t1947, the industrial  dispute  between\tM\/s.
\nJaydip\tIndustries,  Thana, and the workmen  employed  under
\nthem,  arising\tout  of the following demands  made  by\t the
\nworkmen
\n(A)  Following\tmonthly scales of pay should  be  introduced
\nfor all categories of workmen :\n<\/p>\n
     Rs.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Unskilled\t\t\t    150-5.00-200.00\n     Semi-skilled\t\t    175-7.50-250.00\n     Skilled\t\t\t   225-10.00-325.00\n     Highly skilled\t\t   350-25.00-600.00\n\t      (B)   The above\tscales\t of   pay    are\n<\/pre>\n
\t      consolidated  and are on the basis  of  Bombay
\n\t      Working Class Cost of Living Index Number 480.
\n\t      In  case\tif index number move above  480\t for
\n\t      every  point  rise in  Index  Number,  workmen
\n\t      should  be paid ten paise per day as  dearness
\n\t      allowance.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (C)   The\t above rates of pay should  be\tmade
\n\t      effective from 1st February 1965.
\n\t      (D)   For\t the  conversion  of  present  daily
\n\t      rates  into  monthly rates, the  present\trate
\n\t      should  be multiplied by thirty.\t The  amount
\n\t      should  then be fitted in the above  grades.
\n\t      If the amount fells short of minimum of Grades
\n\t      demanded the same should be brought up to\t the
\n\t      minimum.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (E)   After  making  adjustment in  the  above
\n\t      manner  adjustment increments at ‘the rate  of
\n\t      one  for\tevery one year of  service  or\tpart
\n\t      thereof  in  excess of six  months  should  be
\n\t      added to the pay.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
922<\/span><\/p>\n
The  employer  is a partnership concern consisting  of\tfive
\npartners  and is carrying on the business  of  manufacturing
\n“paper\tboard”, at its factory situated in  Majiwada  within
\nthe   limits  of  the  panchayat  of  that   village.\t The
\npartnership  was started in the year 1959, on a capital\t of
\nRs.  1,50,0001-.  The capital has since then been  increased
\nand  it\t was  Rs. 2 lakhs in 1965.  The\t number\t of  workmen
\nemployed  in the concern, at the time of the reference,\t was
\nabout  150.  The workmen were being paid fixed\tconsolidated
\nwages.\n<\/p>\n
The  employer contended before the Tribunal, by its  written
\nstatement  dated February 8, 1966, that it has no  financial
\ncapacity  to  pay  any\tadditional wages,  as  it  has\tbeen
\nsuffering heavy losses year after year.
\nDuring the pendency of the disputes before the Tribunal, the
\nGovernment  of Maharashtra fixed the minimum rates of  wages
\nfor   the  employees  employed\tin   scheduled\t employments
\nincluding  the paper and paper-board manufacturing  industry
\nunder section 3<\/a> of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948,\t hereinafter
\ncalled the Act, by notification published in the Maharashtra
\nGovernment Gazette dated August 4, 1966.  In  implementation
\nof the notification, the wages of the workmen concerned were
\nraised\twith  effect from October, 1966.  The  workmen\twere
\nbeing paid wages at the following rates, before the date  of
\nthe award, in pursuance of the notification :-\n<\/p>\n
     Unskilled\t\t\t\t Rs. 90 per month\n     Semi-skilled\t\t\t Rs. 100 per month\n     Skilled-B\t\t\t\t Rs.115 per month\n     Skilled-A\t\t\t\t Rs. 130 per month\n<\/pre>\n
The Tribunal considered in detail the financial capacity  of
\nthe  employer on the basis of the balance sheets and  profit
\nand loss accounts of the employer for the years 1960 to 1965
\nand  found that its total loss for those years\tamounted  to
\nRs. 78,000′ and on that basis its annual average loss worked
\nout  to\t Rs. 13,000 and so the concern was  not\t financially
\nstable.\t  The Tribunal then came to the conclusion,  on\t the
\nbasis  of  the\tminimum rates of wages fixed by\t it  in\t the
\nawards in the case of M\/s.  Kondivitta Paper and Board Mills
\n(Private)   Limited,   Bombay,\tpublished   in\t Maharashtra
\nGovernment Gazette, dated November 14, 1963, page 3750),  in
\nthe   case  of\tBombay\tMetal  Factory,\t published  in\t the
\nMaharashtra  Government\t Gazette dated May  27,\t 1965  (page
\n1963),\tand  in\t the  case  of\tRatan  Industries,   Bombay,
\npublished
\n923<\/span>
\nin Maharashtra Government Gazette dated June 23, 1966  (page
\n1974),\tthat the rates of wages for the workmen employed  in
\nquestion should be fixed at the following rates:-\n<\/p>\n
     Daily-rated\t\t\t    Monthly-rated
\nUnskilled\t Rs. 4 .50\tUn-skilled   Rs. 117.00
\nSemi-skilled\t Rs. 6 .00    Semi-skilled   Rs. 156.00
\nSkilled\t\t Rs. 7 .50    Skilled\t     Rs. 195.00
\nHighly-skilled\t Rs. 9 -50    Highly-skilled Rs. 247.00
\nand said that
\n\t      “The  above wage rates shall be deemed  to  be
\n\t      fixed as at Bombay Consumer Price Index figure\n<\/p>\n
\t      660.   For a rise of every ten points  in\t the
\n\t      Index  Figure  the workmen shall be  given  an
\n\t      increase\tin  the wages at the rate  of  seven
\n\t      paise  per day.  And for a fall of  every\t ten
\n\t      points  in the Index Figure there shall  be  a
\n\t      reduction\t in the wages at the rate  of  seven
\n\t      paise per day.”\n<\/p>\n
The Tribunal also held that wages it fixed were the  minimum
\nrates  of wages for the workmen in question  and  therefore,
\nthe capacity of the employer to pay was irrelevant.
\nIt was argued for the appellant that the Tribunal was  wrong
\nin fixing minimum wages at higher rates than those fixed  by
\nthe  Government\t under section 3<\/a> of the Act  without  taking
\ninto account the financial capacity of the employer to\tpay.
\nIn  other  words,  the\targument  was  that  when  once\t the
\nappropriate  Government has fixed minimum rates of wages  in
\nthe  employment under section 3<\/a> of the Act, it was not\topen
\nto  the\t Tribunal to fix higher rates of  wages\t as  minimum
\nwages  and,  therefore,\t the rates of  wages  fixed  by\t the
\nTribunal  were not minimum wages, but fair wages, or at\t any
\nrate  wages bordering on fair wages, and so,  the  financial
\ncapacity  of  the  employer to bear  the  additional  burden
\nshould have been taken into account.\n<\/p>\n
The short question for consideration, therefore, is  whether
\nthe Tribunal was right in fixing wages at rates higher\tthan
\nthe  rates  fixed by the Government under section 3<\/a>  of\t the
\nAct, and whether what was fixed by the Tribunal were minimum
\nwages.\n<\/p>\n
Section\t 3(1)<\/a>  of  the Act  provides  that  the\t appropriate
\nGovernment may fix the minimum rates of wages payable to em-
\nployees employed in employments specified in Part I or\tPart
\nR  of  the Schedule thereof and in any employment  added  to
\neither
\n924<\/span>
\npart  by  notification under section 27<\/a>.  By clause  (b)  of
\nsection\t 3(1)<\/a>, the appropriate Government is given power  to
\nreview at such intervals as it may think fit, such intervals
\nnot  exceeding\tfive years, the minimum rates  of  wages  so
\nfixed and  revise the minimum rates, if\t necessary.   Sub-
\nsection (2A) of section 3<\/a> provides
\n\t      “(2A) Where  in  respect\tof  an\tindustrial
\n\t      dispute relating to the rates of wages payable
\n\t      to   any\tof  the\t employees  employed  in   a
\n\t      scheduled\t  employment,  any   proceeding\t  is
\n\t      pending before a Tribunal or National Tribunal
\n\t      under  the Industrial Disputes Act<\/a>,  1947,  or
\n\t      before any like authority under any other\t law
\n\t      for the time being in force, or an award\tmade
\n\t      by  any  Tribunal, National Tribunal  or\tsuch
\n\t      authority is in operation, and a\tnotification
\n\t      fixing or revising ‘the minimum rates of wages
\n\t      in  respect  of the  scheduled  employment  is
\n\t      issued during the pendency of such  proceeding
\n\t      or   the\t operation  of\tthe   award,   then,
\n\t      notwithstanding  anything\t contained  in\tthis
\n\t      Act, the minimum rates of wages so fixed or so
\n\t      revised  shall  not apply to  those  employees
\n\t      during  the period in which the proceeding  is
\n\t      pending  and  the\t award made  therein  is  in
\n\t      operation,  or, as the case may be, where\t the
\n\t\t\t    notification  is issued during the\tpe
\nriod  of
\n\t      operation of an award, during that period; and
\n\t      where such proceeding or award relates to\t the
\n\t      rates of wages payable to all the employees in
\n\t      the scheduled employment, no minimum rates  of
\n\t      wages  shall be fixed or revised in  respected
\n\t      that employment during the said period.”
\nIt  is, therefore, clear that the minimum wage\tcan  provide
\nceedings  before the Tribunal that the notification  by\t the
\nMaharashtra  Government fixing minimum rates of\t wages\tcame
\ninto  operation.  The sub-section would make it\t clear\tthat
\neven  after  the fixation of minimum rates of wages  by\t the
\nappropriate  Government\t under section 3<\/a> of the Act,  it  is
\nopen  to an Industrial Tribunal adjudicating  an  industrial
\ndispute\t relating  to wages payable to the  employees  in  a
\nscheduled employment to fix minimum wages at higher or lower
\nrates, if the dispute was pending at the time of fixation of
\nminimum wages under section 3<\/a> of the Act.  So it was open to
\nthe  Tribunal to fix rates of minimum wages at rates  higher
\nthan  the rates fixed by the Government under section  3<\/a>  of
\nthe  Act.  In other words the Tribunal was not bound by\t the
\nfixation  of  the minimum rates of wages by  the  Government
\nunder  the provisions of section 3<\/a> of the Act and could\t fix
\nhigher rates as minimum wages in its award.\n<\/p>\n
925<\/span><\/p>\n
In considering the question what are the component  elements
\nof  minimum  wages,  this Court observed as  follows  in  U.\n<\/p>\n
Unichoyi v.    State of Kerala<\/a>(1): –\n<\/p>\n
\t      “Sometimes the minimum wage is described as  a
\n\t      bare  minimum wage in order to distinguish  it
\n\t      from the wage structure which is\t‘subsistence
\n\t      plus’  or fair wage, but too much emphasis  on
\n\t      the  adjective  ‘bare’  in  relation  to\t the
\n\t      minimum  wage is apt to lead to the  erroneous
\n\t      assumption that the maintenance wage is a wage
\n\t      which  enables  the worker to cover  his\tbare
\n\t      physical\tneeds  and keep himself\t just  above
\n\t      starvation.   That clearly is not intended  by
\n\t      the  concept  of minimum wage.  On  the  other
\n\t      hand,  since the capacity of the\temployer  to
\n\t      pay is treated as irrelevant, it is but  right
\n\t      that  no\taddition  should  be  made  to\t the
\n\t      components  of  the minimum wage\twhich  would
\n\t      take the minimum wage near the lower level  of
\n\t      the  fair\t wage,\tbut  the  contents  of\tthis
\n\t      concept must ensure for the employee not\tonly
\n\t      his  subsistence\tand that of his\t family\t but
\n\t      must also preserve his efficiency as a worker.
\n\t      The  Act<\/a> contemplates that minimum wage  rates
\n\t      should  be fixed in the  scheduled  industrial
\n\t      with  the dual object of providing  sustenance
\n\t      and maintenance of ‘the worker and his  family
\n\t      and preserving his efficiency as a worker.”
\nIt  is, therefore, clear that the minimum wage\tcan  provide
\nnot  only for the bare sustenance of life but also  for\t the
\npreservation  of  the efficiency of the worker.\t We  do\t not
\nthink  that  the rates of wages fixed by the  Tribunal\twere
\nfair  wages or wages bordering on fair wages.  The  Tribunal
\nhas  referred  to The minimum rates of wages  fixed  in\t the
\nseveral\t awards\t passed by it from 1962\t onwards,  and\talso
\nconsidered  the rise in the cost of living.  In\t particular,
\nthe  Tribunal was careful to take into account the  Consumer
\nPrice  Index for the month of December, 1966. and  that\t for
\nthe  month  of January, 1967, for coming to  the  conclusion
\nthat  rates higher than those specified in the\tnotification
\npublished  by Government should be fixed as  minimum  wages.
\nAs  the rates fixed by the Tribunal were minimum  rates\t of
\nwages  as  explained in the case of U.\tUnichoy\t v.State  of
\nKerala<\/a>(1), we do not think that the capacity of the industry
\nto pay was a relevant consideration.\n<\/p>\n
There  was also no material before the Tribunal to  come  to
\nthe  conclusion\t that the Government in fixing\tthe  minimum
\nrates  of wages, took into consideration all the  components
\nin the fixation
\n(1)  [1962] 1 S.C.R. 957.\n<\/p>\n
926<\/span><\/p>\n
Of  minimum wages as explained by this Court in U.  Unichoyi
\nv. State of Kerala<\/a>(1).\n<\/p>\n
In the light of the provisions of section 3<\/a> (2A) of the Act<\/a>,
\nwe  hold  that the Tribunal was not bound by  the  rates  of
\nminimum wages fixed by the Government under section 3<\/a> of the
\nAct  and  that it was open to the Tribunal to fix  rates  of
\nminimum\t wages\tto be paid to the workmen concerned  in\t the
\ndisputes   at  figures\thigher\tthan  those  fixed  by\t the
\nGovernment.\n<\/p>\n
It  was\t contended  on\tbehalf of  the\tappellant  that\t the
\nemployer  has  his  place of business outside  the  city  of
\nBombay and that in the city of Bombay, the wages for workmen
\nare  generally\thigher\tthan those  outside  the  city,\t and
\ntherefore,  the\t Tribunal went wrong in taking\tthe  minimum
\nrates  of wages fixed in the various awards for\t workmen  in
\nthe city of Bombay as criteria for fixing the minimum  wages
\nfor workmen outside the city.  The Tribunal considered\tthis
\nquestion  and held that the rates of minimum wages fixed  by
\nthe Government for the city of Bombay, the town of Thana and
\nalso  for  the village of Majiwada,  where  the\t appellant’s
\nfactory is situate, are the same and so, the rates of  wages
\nat  Majiwada are not lower than the wage rates obtaining  in
\nthe  city of Bombay and Thana.\tWe do not, therefore,  think
\nthat  the  Tribunal went wrong in’ taking into\taccount\t the
\nrates  of minimum wages fixed in the several awards for\t the
\nworkmen employed in the city of Bombay as affording criteria
\nfor fixing minimum rates of wages with suitable modification
\nfor the workmen employed under the appellant.
\nWe dismiss the appeal but, since there is no appearance\t for
\nthe respondent, we make no order as to costs,.\n<\/p>\n
K.B.N.\t\t\t\t   Appeal dismissed.,\n(1) [1962] 1 S.C.R. 957\n927<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971 Equivalent citations: 1972 AIR 605, 1972 SCR (2) 920 Author: K K Mathew Bench: Mathew, Kuttyil Kurien PETITIONER: JAYDIP INDUSTRIES, THANA Vs. RESPONDENT: THE WORKMEN DATE OF JUDGMENT16\/12\/1971 BENCH: MATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN BENCH: MATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN VAIDYIALINGAM, C.A. CITATION: 1972 AIR […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-255228","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nJaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1971-12-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-01-30T15:09:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971\",\"datePublished\":\"1971-12-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-30T15:09:34+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971\"},\"wordCount\":2143,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971\",\"name\":\"Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1971-12-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-30T15:09:34+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1971-12-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-01-30T15:09:34+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971","datePublished":"1971-12-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-30T15:09:34+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971"},"wordCount":2143,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971","name":"Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1971-12-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-30T15:09:34+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaydip-industries-thana-vs-the-workmen-on-16-december-1971#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jaydip Industries, Thana vs The Workmen on 16 December, 1971"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255228","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=255228"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255228\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=255228"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=255228"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=255228"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}