Full Judgment Text
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10001 of 2010
PEPSICO (INDIA) HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
GROCERY MARKETS & SHOPS BOARD & ORS. Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.
1. The appellant approached this Court aggrieved by
the Judgment dated 22.07.2009 passed by the High Court
of judicature of Bombay in Writ Petition No. 4937 of
2009.
2. The dispute pertains to the application of the
Scheme framed under the Maharashtra Mathadi, Hamal and
Other Manual Workers (Regulation of Employment and
Welfare) Act, 1969.
3. Mr. V. Giri, learned senior counsel appearing for
JUDGMENT
the appellant, has submitted that there was also a
challenge with regard to the application of the Act as
well. Be that as it may, the High Court, by the
impugned Judgment has relegated the appellant to the
remedy available under Section 5 of the Act which reads
as under :-
"5. Disputes regarding application
of scheme - If any question arises
whether any scheme applies to any
1
Page 1
class of unprotected workers or
employers, the matter shall be
referred to the State Government and
the decision of the State Government
on the question, which shall be taken
after consulting the Advisory
Committee constituted under section
14, shall be final."
4. The following are the directions issued by the High
Court :-
"(i) The petitioner shall make an
application and/or reference to the
State Government under section 5 of
the Mathadi Act within a period of
eight weeks from today.
(ii) The Government shall
entertain the said reference and
JUDGMENT
shall decide the same within a period
of 12 weeks after giving opportunity
to all concerned, namely, the
concerned Boards, workers and the
Petition.
(iii) So far as the workers which
have been noted by the Board to be
covered under the Scheme are
2
Page 2
concerned, their services are
protected for a period of 12 weeks
and the Petitioner shall provide them
work and make payment as per the
Board directions during the pendency
of the reference.
(iv) Petition is accordingly
disposed of by making the Rule
absolute in the aforesaid terms."
5. In view of the language employed in Section 5, we
make it clear that it will be open to the appellant
to raise all disputes, whether it be on the factory
at Rajangarh or the warehouse at Panvel, to the
Government and the Government shall address the same.
6. We give liberty to the appellant a further period
of 12 weeks from today to raise the disputes before
the Government and the Government shall consider and
JUDGMENT
pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within
three months thereafter.
7. Till the orders are passed as above, the interim
order passed by this Court on 18.11.2010 shall
continue.
8. We also make it clear that we have not considered
the appeal on merits and all the contentions
available to both the sides are left open.
3
Page 3
9. In view of the above, the civil appeal is
disposed of with no order as to costs.
.......................J.
[ KURIAN JOSEPH ]
.......................J.
[ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]
New Delhi;
February 04, 2016.
JUDGMENT
4
Page 4