Date of the Judgment: September 19, 2024
Citation: 2024 INSC 703
Judges: Sandeep Mehta, J., R. Mahadevan, J.
Can temporary employees in the Public Works Department claim the same holiday benefits as permanent staff? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question, focusing on the entitlements of employees under the Kalelkar Award. This judgment clarifies the rights of temporary employees to public holidays and compensation for work on those days. The bench, consisting of Justices Sandeep Mehta and R. Mahadevan, delivered a unanimous decision.
Case Background
The case involves several employees (respondents) who were appointed as Mailmujar and Mali in the Public Works Department between 1982 and 1997. Initially, they were on a temporary basis. On February 27, 2004, these employees were placed on the Converted Temporary Establishment as per the Kalelkar Award. This award, established in 1967, sets the service conditions for workers in the Public Works Department, entitling them to public holidays and holidays on the 2nd and 4th Saturdays of each month.
However, a Government Resolution dated January 10, 1974, sought to withdraw these benefits for field staff, stating they were not eligible for public holidays or 2nd and 4th Saturday holidays. This resolution was later superseded by a Government Resolution on September 12, 1980, which revoked previous orders and provided revised guidelines. This new resolution stated that employees in zonal, divisional, and sub-divisional offices were eligible for public holidays and 2nd and 4th Saturday holidays. Despite this, the respondent-employees were not granted these benefits and were compelled to work on holidays without additional compensation.
The employees made multiple representations to their employer, the Public Works Department, requesting enforcement of their rights under the Kalelkar Award, but their requests were denied. Consequently, they filed a complaint before the Industrial Court under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971, seeking enforcement of their rights, including back wages for work done on holidays.
Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1982-1997 | Respondent-employees appointed as Mailmujar and Mali in the Public Works Department. |
| 1967 | Kalelkar Award came into effect, determining service conditions for Public Works Department workers. |
| January 10, 1974 | Government Resolution issued, withdrawing holiday benefits for field staff. |
| September 12, 1980 | Government Resolution issued, revoking previous orders and revising holiday guidelines. |
| February 27, 2004 | Respondent-employees placed on the Converted Temporary Establishment as per the Kalelkar Award. |
| May 27, 1996 | Communication dismissing the employees’ complaint. |
| October 31, 2009 | Industrial Court allowed the complaint of the respondent-employees. |
| November 15, 2014 | High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissed the writ petition filed by the employer. |
| September 19, 2024 | Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of the employer. |
Course of Proceedings
The Industrial Court, Yavatmal, ruled in favor of the respondent-employees on October 31, 2009, upholding their claim for holiday entitlements and overtime pay as per the Kalelkar Award. The Industrial Court found that the government circular issued on May 27, 1996, did not exclude the complainants from these benefits.
The employer then filed a writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, which was dismissed on November 15, 2014. The High Court upheld the Industrial Court’s decision, stating that employees covered under the Kalelkar Award are entitled to government holidays and overtime pay for working on 2nd and 4th Saturdays. The High Court also affirmed that the government circular excluding certain employees from these benefits was invalid.
Aggrieved by the High Court’s decision, the employer filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court, leading to the present appeal.
Legal Framework
The primary legal framework for this case is the Kalelkar Award, which governs the service conditions of workers in the Public Works Department. The award stipulates that employees are entitled to government-approved public holidays. Demand Number 5 of the Kalelkar Award states:
“The employee in the work charged, regular temporary and permanent category shall be entitled for the Government Holidays approved by the Government . The employee on daily wages shall be; entitled for the three paid leave in a year that is on 1) 26th January, 2) 15th August and 3) 2nd October as per the existing practice”. Similarly additional four optional paid; leave shall be granted to these employ ees by taking into: consideration the exigency of work. The employee shall avail these leave on any day of festival as per their: choice. But they are required to make an application in. advance for availing these optional leave.”
Demand number 6 of the Kalelkar Award states:
“All the employees shall be paid overtime allowance as per the provisions of section 14 (Annexure -:8) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The employees, who are being paid overtime allowance at present, shall be paid overtime allowance at the double rate of minimum wages or at one and a half time rate of the actual salary of the employee whichever rate is higher, as prescribed in the Government notification issued as per the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.”
The Minimum Wages Act, 1948 is also relevant, particularly Section 14, which deals with overtime allowances. Additionally, the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971, under which the employees filed their complaint, provides a mechanism for addressing unfair labor practices. Section 28 of this Act allows employees to file complaints against such practices.
Arguments
Arguments on behalf of the Appellants (Employer):
- The employer argued that while the respondent-employees were paid monthly salaries as per the Kalelkar Award, they were not entitled to the same leave benefits as permanent employees.
- They contended that additional holidays and overtime wages should not be extended to temporary workers, as their conditions of employment are different.
- The employer relied on a Government Circular issued on May 27, 1996, stating that the respondent-employees were not entitled to the benefits under the Kalelkar Award.
- The employer also argued that some employees were deputed to work at the Guest House, where their presence was essential, and they were already getting one week off regularly.
Arguments on behalf of the Respondents (Employees):
- The employees argued that they were rightfully entitled to the benefits under the Kalelkar Award, including government holidays, holidays on the 2nd and 4th Saturdays, and overtime pay.
- They contended that the employer engaged in unfair labor practices by denying these benefits and compelling them to work on holidays without compensation.
- The employees further argued that the employer failed to issue a notice under Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, when altering their service conditions.
- The employees asserted that the Industrial Court and the High Court had correctly upheld their claims based on the Kalelkar Award.
| Main Submissions | Sub-Submissions (Employer) | Sub-Submissions (Employees) |
|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to Holiday Benefits |
|
|
| Overtime Compensation |
|
|
Innovativeness of the argument: The employees’ argument that the employer failed to issue a notice under Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, when altering their service conditions is a notable point of contention. This argument highlights a procedural lapse by the employer, which is crucial in labor law.
Issues Framed by the Supreme Court
The primary issue before the Supreme Court was:
- Whether the respondent-employees, who are working in the Public Works Department as a Converted Temporary Establishment and fall within the domain of the Kalelkar Award, are entitled to get the benefits of public holidays as well as holidays on the 2nd and 4th Saturdays of each month.
Treatment of the Issue by the Court
| Issue | Court’s Decision | Brief Reasons |
|---|---|---|
| Whether the respondent-employees are entitled to public holidays and holidays on the 2nd and 4th Saturdays. | Yes, the respondent-employees are entitled to these benefits. | The employees were placed on the Converted Temporary Establishment under the Kalelkar Award, which provides for these benefits for all employees except daily wage workers. The Government Circular of 1996 does not apply to these employees. |
Authorities
The Court considered the following authorities:
- Kalelkar Award: This award, established in 1967, determines the service conditions of workers in the Public Works Department, including holiday entitlements.
- Government Resolution No. PAS -1070/741883 -E(2)(2), dated 10th January 1974: This resolution sought to withdraw holiday benefits for field staff.
- Government Resolution No. LAB -1080/1047(119) -A(14), dated 12th September 1980: This resolution revoked previous orders and revised holiday guidelines, making employees in zonal, divisional, and sub-divisional offices eligible for public holidays and 2nd and 4th Saturday holidays.
- Section 14 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948: This section deals with overtime allowances.
- Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971: This section provides a mechanism for addressing unfair labor practices.
| Authority | How Considered by the Court |
|---|---|
| Kalelkar Award | The Court relied on the Kalelkar Award as the primary basis for determining the employees’ entitlements. |
| Government Resolution dated 10th January 1974 | The Court noted this resolution but found it to be superseded by later resolutions. |
| Government Resolution dated 12th September 1980 | The Court relied on this resolution, which provided revised guidelines for holiday entitlements. |
| Section 14 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 | The Court referred to this section regarding overtime allowances, as mentioned in the Kalelkar Award. |
| Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971 | The Court acknowledged this as the basis for the employees’ complaint before the Industrial Court. |
Judgment
| Submission | How Treated by the Court |
|---|---|
| Employer’s submission that temporary employees are not entitled to the same benefits as permanent employees. | Rejected. The Court held that the Kalelkar Award applies to all categories of employees except daily wage workers, and the respondent-employees were not daily wage workers. |
| Employer’s reliance on the Government Circular of May 27, 1996. | Rejected. The Court found that the circular was specific to cases before the Industrial Court in Bombay and did not apply to the respondent-employees. |
| Employees’ submission that they are entitled to benefits under the Kalelkar Award. | Accepted. The Court held that the employees, placed on the Converted Temporary Establishment, were entitled to the benefits stipulated under the Kalelkar Award. |
| Employees’ submission that the employer engaged in unfair labor practices. | Accepted. The Court found that the employer had denied the employees their rightful entitlements. |
How each authority was viewed by the Court?
- Kalelkar Award: The Court relied heavily on the Kalelkar Award, stating it was the primary basis for determining the employees’ entitlements. The Court emphasized that the award specifically includes temporary employees in its ambit, except for daily wage employees.
- Government Resolution No. PAS -1070/741883 -E(2)(2), dated 10th January 1974: The Court acknowledged this resolution but noted that it was superseded by later resolutions. The Court clarified that this resolution, which sought to withdraw holiday benefits for field staff, was not applicable to the present case.
- Government Resolution No. LAB -1080/1047(119) -A(14), dated 12th September 1980: The Court relied on this resolution, which provided revised guidelines for holiday entitlements. The Court noted that this resolution made employees in zonal, divisional, and sub-divisional offices eligible for public holidays and 2nd and 4th Saturday holidays.
- Section 14 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948: The Court referred to this section regarding overtime allowances, as mentioned in the Kalelkar Award. The Court noted that the Kalelkar Award references this section for determining overtime pay.
- Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971: The Court acknowledged this as the basis for the employees’ complaint before the Industrial Court. The Court recognized that this section allows employees to file complaints against unfair labor practices.
What weighed in the mind of the Court?
The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the explicit provisions of the Kalelkar Award, which clearly states that all employees except daily wage workers are entitled to government-approved public holidays. The Court emphasized that the respondent-employees were placed on the Converted Temporary Establishment under this award, thereby making them eligible for the stipulated benefits.
The Court also noted that the Government Circular of May 27, 1996, which the employer relied upon, was specific to cases before the Industrial Court in Bombay and did not apply to the respondent-employees. The Court found that the circular did not negate the eligibility of the respondent-employees for Government holidays and overtime allowances.
The Court also considered the fact that the Industrial Court and the High Court had both ruled in favor of the employees, and there was no infirmity in these judgments that warranted interference by the Supreme Court.
| Sentiment | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Emphasis on Kalelkar Award | 50% |
| Inapplicability of 1996 Circular | 30% |
| Upholding Lower Court Decisions | 20% |
| Ratio | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Fact | 30% |
| Law | 70% |
Logical Reasoning:
The Court considered alternative interpretations, such as the employer’s argument that temporary employees should not receive the same benefits as permanent employees. However, the Court rejected this argument, stating that the Kalelkar Award makes no such distinction, except for daily wage employees.
The Court also rejected the employer’s reliance on the Government Circular of May 27, 1996, finding that it was not applicable to the respondent-employees.
The decision was reached by emphasizing the specific provisions of the Kalelkar Award and the factual matrix of the case, which clearly showed that the respondent-employees were entitled to the benefits claimed.
The Court’s reasoning is based on the following points:
- The respondent-employees were placed on the Converted Temporary Establishment under the Kalelkar Award.
- The Kalelkar Award explicitly states that all employees, except daily wage workers, are entitled to government-approved public holidays.
- The Government Circular of May 27, 1996, does not apply to the respondent-employees.
The Court quoted the Kalelkar Award:
“Demand Number 5: – The employee in the work charged, regular temporary and permanent category shall be entitled for the Government Holidays approved by the Government . The employee on daily wages shall be; entitled for the three paid leave in a year that is on 1) 26th January, 2) 15th August and 3) 2nd October as per the existing practice”. Similarly additional four optional paid; leave shall be granted to these employ ees by taking into: consideration the exigency of work. The employee shall avail these leave on any day of festival as per their: choice. But they are required to make an application in. advance for availing these optional leave.”
The Court also quoted the Kalelkar Award regarding overtime:
“Demand number 6 : – All the employees shall be paid overtime allowance as per the provisions of section 14 (Annexure -:8) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The employees, who are being paid overtime allowance at present, shall be paid overtime allowance at the double rate of minimum wages or at one and a half time rate of the actual salary of the employee whichever rate is higher, as prescribed in the Government notification issued as per the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948.”
The bench was unanimous, with both Justices Sandeep Mehta and R. Mahadevan concurring in the judgment.
Key Takeaways
- Temporary employees in the Public Works Department, who are part of the Converted Temporary Establishment under the Kalelkar Award, are entitled to the same public holidays and 2nd and 4th Saturday holidays as permanent employees.
- Employers must comply with the provisions of the Kalelkar Award regarding holiday entitlements and overtime pay.
- Government circulars cannot override the specific provisions of the Kalelkar Award.
- Employers must ensure that they do not engage in unfair labor practices by denying rightful benefits to their employees.
- The judgment reinforces the importance of adhering to labor laws and ensuring fair treatment of all employees, regardless of their employment status (except daily wage workers).
Directions
The Supreme Court directed the employer to comply with the order passed by the Industrial Court, and later affirmed by the High Court, within a period of eight weeks.
Development of Law
The ratio decidendi of this case is that temporary employees who are part of the Converted Temporary Establishment under the Kalelkar Award are entitled to the same holiday benefits as permanent employees, except for daily wage workers. This judgment clarifies that the Kalelkar Award’s provisions are applicable to all employees except daily wage workers and that government circulars cannot override the specific provisions of the award. This reinforces the rights of temporary employees and ensures fair treatment under labor laws. The Supreme Court upheld the Industrial Court’s decision and the High Court’s affirmation of that decision, thus solidifying the position of law.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Public Works Department, upholding the rights of temporary employees to receive public holidays and overtime pay as per the Kalelkar Award. The Court emphasized that the Kalelkar Award applies to all employees except daily wage workers and that the government circular relied upon by the employer was not applicable in this case. The employer is directed to comply with the Industrial Court’s order within eight weeks.
Category
Parent Category: Labour Law
Child Categories:
- Kalelkar Award
- Public Works Department Employees
- Temporary Employees Rights
- Overtime Pay
- Government Holidays
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971
- Minimum Wages Act, 1948
Parent Category: Minimum Wages Act, 1948
Child Categories:
- Section 14, Minimum Wages Act, 1948
Parent Category: Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971
Child Categories:
- Section 28, Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971
FAQ
Q: What is the Kalelkar Award?
A: The Kalelkar Award is an agreement that determines the service conditions for workers in the Public Works Department, including holiday entitlements and overtime pay.
Q: Who is covered by the Kalelkar Award?
A: All employees of the Public Works Department, except daily wage workers, are covered by the Kalelkar Award. This includes temporary employees on the Converted Temporary Establishment.
Q: Are temporary employees entitled to the same holiday benefits as permanent employees?
A: Yes, temporary employees who are part of the Converted Temporary Establishment under the Kalelkar Award are entitled to the same public holidays and 2nd and 4th Saturday holidays as permanent employees.
Q: What should I do if my employer is not giving me holiday benefits as per the Kalelkar Award?
A: You can file a complaint with the Industrial Court under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practice Act, 1971.
Q: What does the Supreme Court judgment mean for employers?
A: Employers must comply with the provisions of the Kalelkar Award regarding holiday entitlements and overtime pay for all employees except daily wage workers. They cannot deny these benefits to temporary employees on the Converted Temporary Establishment.
Q: What does the Supreme Court judgment mean for employees?
A: The Supreme Court judgment reinforces the rights of temporary employees to receive public holidays and overtime pay as per the Kalelkar Award. It ensures fair treatment of all employees, regardless of their employment status (except daily wage workers).