Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Payment of Bonus Act, 1965

27 judgments · newest first · showing 1–27

THE MANAGEMENT OF WORTH TRUSTversusTHE SECRETARY, WORTH TRUST WORKERS UNION

2025 INSC 432Dismissed

The Worth Trust, a charitable organization that also runs commercial factories, was challenged by its workers' union for payment of bonus and ex-gratia for the year 1996-97. The union argued that the workers, employed in the Trust's factories, fall within the definition of "workmen" under the …

H.P: STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR.versusRANJEET SINGH AND ORS.

2008 INSC 309Case Allowed

The appellant, H.P. State Electricity Board, appealed against the Labour Court and Himachal Pradesh High Court decisions that had granted daily‑wage workers (respondents) a minimum bonus under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The respondents had filed applications under Section 33‑C(2) of the …

M/S. HAMDARD (WAKF) LABORATORIESversusDEPUTY LABOUR COMMR. AND ORS.

2007 INSC 487Appeal(s) allowed

The employer, Mis. Hamdard (Wakf) Laboratories, terminated 37 workmen alleging an illegal strike, leading to an industrial dispute and an award reinstating 17 workers with 50% back‑wages. The workmen later filed applications under Section 6‑H(l) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act seeking bonus, …

SPIC PHARMACEUTICALS DIVISIONversusAUTHORITY UNDER SEC. 48(1) OF A.P. AND ANR.

2007 INSC 232Disposed off

The appellants, manufacturers of pharmaceutical products, dismissed several medical representatives and the employees sought relief from the appellate authority under the Andhra Pradesh Shops and Establishments Act, 1988. The employers contended that the Sales Promotion Employees (Conditions of …

A.P. FOODSversusS. SAMUEL AND ORS.

2006 INSC 391Case Partly allowed

A.P. Foods, a non‑profit public‑sector establishment run by the Andhra Pradesh Nutrition Council, was challenged by its employees who demanded bonus under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The Labour Commissioner held the Act inapplicable, but the employer later paid ex‑gratia and subsequently stopped …

STATE BANK'S STAFF UNION (MADRAS CIRCLE)versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 419Dismissed

The Central Government Industrial Tribunal awarded a customary bonus to State Bank of India employees, which the bank’s management challenged. While the award was pending, Parliament enacted the Banking Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984, inserting provisions in the State Bank Act and related statutes that …

AHMEDABAD PVT. PRIMARY TEACHERS' ASSOCIATIONversusADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER AND ORS.

2004 INSC 32Dismissed

A teacher employed by a municipal school sought gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, but the Gujarat High Court held that teachers are not "employees" within the meaning of section 2(e) and dismissed the claim. The Ahmedabad Private Primary Teachers' Association appealed, arguing that …

STATE OF TAMIL NADUversusK. SABANYAGAM AND ANR. ETC.

1997 INSC 754Dismissed

The Tamil Nadu Housing Board was exempted from the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 by two Government Orders issued under Section 36 of the Act (1979 and 1982). Employees of the Board challenged the exemptions, and the Madras High Court set aside the orders, directing the Board to pay statutory bonus from …

HOUSING BOARD OF HARYANAversusHARYANA HOUSING BOARD EMPLOYEES UNION AND ORS.

1995 INSC 643Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Haryana Housing Board (HHB) qualifies as a "local authority" under section 32(iv) of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The Board is a statutory corporation whose members are appointed by the State Government and whose functions are subject to extensive …

COFFEE BOARD EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION AND ORS.versusA. C. SHIV.A GOWDA AND ORS.

1991 INSC 335Appeal(s) allowed

The Coffee Board, which employs staff for storing, curing and marketing coffee, made an ex‑gratia payment to those employees equal to the minimum bonus payable under the Payment of Bonus Act for the years 1964‑65 to 1968‑69. The payment was made from the surplus "Pool Fund" created under Section 32 …

RADHU K. KAKDE OF BOMBAY INHABITANT, BOMBAYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 247Dismissed

The appellant challenged the applicability of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 to employees of the Canteen Stores Department (India), arguing that the department was not an "establishment" engaged in an industry under a Central Government department and thus should not fall within the exemption of …

THE WORKMEN OF M/S. BINNY LTD.versusTHE MANAGEMENT OF BINNY LTD. & ANOTHER

1985 INSC 182Appeal(s) allowed

The workmen of the former Binny & Co. Ltd., now employed by the amalgamated Binny Ltd., claimed a 20% bonus for the financial year 1969 based on a separate profit and loss account prepared for their original unit, which showed a substantial profit. The new company paid only a 4% bonus calculated on …

MUKESH ADVANIversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1985 INSC 120Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition filed by Mukesh Advani on behalf of bonded labourers from Tamil Nadu working in stone quarries at Raisen, Madhya Pradesh, alleging exploitation through advance payments, piece‑rate wages below minimum, and denial of statutory protections. An …

SAKHKKAR MILLS MAZDOOR SANGHversusGWALIOR SUGAR CO. LTD.

1985 INSC 31Appeal(s) allowed

Gwalior Sugar Co. employed 800 seasonal workers who worked only during the sugar‑cane crushing season. The employer refused to pay them the minimum bonus guaranteed under Section 10 of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, arguing that they were not employed for the whole accounting year. The Industrial …

RASHTRIYA MILL MAZDOOR SANGH, NAGPURversusTHE MODEL MILLS, NAGPUR AND ANR.

1984 INSC 171Appeal(s) allowed

The Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh filed four references under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act seeking bonus for workmen of Model Mills, Nagpur for the years 1964‑68, alleging the employer was liable under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The employer contended that a notified order under Section …

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusR. C. JAIN & ORS.

1981 INSC 35Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) had paid bonus to its employees for ten years until 1973‑74, after which it stopped the payments on advice of the Ministry of Law. The employees challenged the stoppage by filing a writ petition, which the Delhi High Court allowed. The Union of India and the DDA …